[Whistler]

Reading in a thread in the unschooling forum a parent mentioned "sweetening the deal" involving a large family decision. Another parent replied that she does that too but often feels guilty that she is bribing her child to accept her decision.

I have thought about this with my kids. For example, sometimes after they clean up all their toys quickly and without complaining I will "reward" them with something. I have done it enough that they kind of expect it now and I feel like I am bribing them to pick up their toys.

As I have pondered this concept, though, what really is a reward and what is a bribe? Those of us who hate our jobs would say we only work because they pay us to do it. Are we being bribed to work? Or is bribery only payment to do something illegal?

I'm curious for your thoughts on this. What constitutes a bribe to you, especially in regards to your kids? Do you bribe your kids? Feel guilty? Never use bribes? When does a reward become a bribe? When is just "sweetening the deal" ok? I'm really curious what other moms do with this issue.

 

[newbymom05]

I though a bribe came before the act, a reward afterward.

 

[philomom]

I never bribe. I do intermittent rewards.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery

If I read the entry correctly... a bribe is given beforehand to influence a person's actions.

 

[vegasgrl]

That would mean, then, that the promise of a reward prior to the act would make the promise itself a bribe? (Or in your kids' case, the expectation?)

This is interesting.

:

 

[Serendipity]

I think its only a bribe if you use it to negotiate and get desired behavior or result.

Bribery: "If you come to the store with me and don't run, you can pick a candy from the check out lane."

Not Bribery: "We need some milk from the store, how about we get a candy too?"

I get my kids a candy almost every time we go to the store, but it isn't contingent upon behavior and it isn't used as a tool.

 

[newbymom05]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipity I think its only a bribe if you use it to negotiate and get desired behavior or result. Bribery: "If you come to the store with me and don't run, you can pick a candy from the check out lane." Not Bribery: "We need some milk from the store, how about we get a candy too?" I get my kids a candy almost every time we go to the store, but it isn't contingent upon behavior and it isn't used as a tool.

And following this example, "You did such a nice job following directions at the store, I'll buy you a candy" (reward).

 

[Whistler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by newbymom05 And following this example, "You did such a nice job following directions at the store, I'll buy you a candy" (reward).

So what happens when the smart kid says "You bought me candy last time I followed directions. If I follow directions this time will you buy me candy again?" To which I sometimes give the mean-mommy answer of no, you need to follow directions anyway. But when they ask hopefully every time thereafter and the next time I say yes, is it bribery?

 

[Super Glue Mommy]

which is why I find its best not to tie behavior to bribes/rewards or threats.

 

[LuxPerpetua]

I must admit to being a Kohn devotee. To me all bribes and rewards are used for manipulation. I'm not implying a judgment into that (as in, moms are evil if they reward their children to get desired behavior) but I think it's important to recognize that these things are manipulative (as is punishment). There very well may be times in which the best option is some sort of bribery; I don't want to make a blanket statement against bribes because I cannot conceive of every possibility facing frazzled parents, but I will say that in my own parenting I have never yet used a bribe. For me, bribery: "If you'll sit in the grocery cart I'll let you scan the credit card when we pay." (Translation: I'll reward you if you behave a certain way; if you do not behave, you will not get the reward = Manipulation). Non-bribery: "How about you swipe the credit card when we pay? That sounds like fun!" (The reward is not contingent upon behavior). Another example, bribery: "If you go to the grocery store I'll let you swipe the credit card." Non-bribery: "Let's go to the grocery store together. If you want to, you can swipe the credit card at the end." It may seem like nit-picking but I think it's important how language is used. In the bribery examples there is a power dichotomy presented; in the non-bribery option, that dichotomy is diffused. Manipulation always involves a more powerful authority using their power as leverage to get a result they want from a person with less authority.

For the toy issue that you mentioned, I would just make it known by word and example that we should keep our house clean. Picking up toys is part of that and it is an expectation. If dd is resistent, we do it together. A reward in this case might be, "Wow. Picking up all those toys was hard work. How about we go read a book together and rest?" This statement is non-manipulative (task has already been completed, and the reward was not tied to child's behavior). Preferably, the reward would be spontaneous and not intended to cause behavior to recur.

Taking your example, I think someone who works just for money is consenting to a form of corporate bribery/reward (I don't really see much point in hashing out the semantics here). Hopefully, though, there would be other intrinsic motivation to counter that (such as nice co-workers or some sense of accomplishment or something), but if it is just for the sake of money then the company is paying that person to manipulate them into doing something they'd rather not do otherwise.

 

[Whistler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LuxPerpetua For the toy issue that you mentioned, I would just make it known by word and example that we should keep our house clean. Picking up toys is part of that and it is an expectation. If dd is resistent, we do it together. A reward in this case might be, "Wow. Picking up all those toys was hard work. How about we go read a book together and rest?" This statement is non-manipulative (task has already been completed, and the reward was not tied to child's behavior). Preferably, the reward would be spontaneous and not intended to cause behavior to recur.

I totally agree with you here. In my ideal world this would always happen exactly this way.

 

[4evermom]

Part of "sweetening the deal" is that the "sweetening" is only possible if the goal is accomplished. Getting candy at the store can only happen if the kids go to the store (versus refusing and everyone has to stay home). It's pointing out the possibilities if a goal is accomplished that aren't necessarily possible otherwise. That's ok in my book. It doesn't depend on behavior (other than coming along because it's illegal or unsafe to leave the child at home). It isn't a carrot dangling in front that won't be given after all if the child's behavior doesn't meet an arbitrary standard.

Since I do buy candy for ds at the store, the only time I wouldn't would be if I didn't have the cash. I go to stores knowing what ds expects and we talk about anything that might cause those expectations not to be met. Ds is a reasonable kid and accepts reasonable answers from a consistent mama

. And he doesn't even ask for candy every time we go anymore. He will if he is hungry or sees something particular he hasn't had in a while. But maybe he'd rather a mini pizza from the snackbar...

 

[churndash]

I don't see any difference between bribes and rewards.

They are both offers of material goods or services in order to induce a certain kind of behavior.

Using the example of the grocery store - I have never promised my children anything to make them behave in the store. I just expected them to behave, and they did.

 

[frontierpsych]

I see both bribes and rewards as manipulative. Again, not a value judgement, perse, but they send the same message: Good things happen when you behave, when you don't behave, these things don't happen. IMO it teaches kids to look at what's in it for THEM before choosing their actions, instead of doing the right thing because it is the right thing. Also, THEIR right thing might not be OUR right thing, and as long as no one's getting hurt, I see that as a good thing. We don't all have the same goals in life, and I don't expect my child to always want the same things out of life that I do.

 

[journeymom]

Maybe there are degrees of bribery.

I'll give you candy if you will behave properly in the grocery store.

I'll give you $200 if you don't write me a speeding ticket.

They're both bribes, but interestingly enough the person I perceive to be the authority in each example (mom/police officer) is on opposite sides of the receiving end.

I guess the difference is that one party is bribing to induce good behavior, the other party is bribing to get away with bad behavior.

Edited to say I notice that another difference is that in the mom/child example the bribe happens before the action. In the driver/cop example, the bribe happens after the action. So like the poster above mentioned, maybe before/after has something to do with it.

What if the county paid us money if we didn't break any traffic laws the previous year? That's just impractical. Basically the county would be paying us not to get caught.

Actually, Allstate auto insurance does that. They reward you, give you a bonus, for not getting points on your record.

What if our kids gave us something if we agreed not to punish them? [whispered] "Hey, Ma, I'll give you my Lego collection if you look the other way about that little incident with the lamp."

I dunno, that gets a little silly.

But my observation about which side of the bribery equation the person of authority is on is interesting.

 

[Landover]

These things always crack me up. Sorry... I am a college prof turned stay at home mom and have read (and taught) Kohn out the wazoo as well as teaching applied behavioral analysis from a strict behavioral persective. The "power dichotomoy" always makes me giggle a little too. Here's the way I see it. Human nature works off of behavioral rewards. Humans, in general, will structure their environment in order to earn rewards. If one is alone on an island, they will structure it so that their behavior is rewarded in some way. Heck, I gave myself an M&M everytime I finished a paragraph on my dissertation.

I absolutely give my kiddo some sort of reward when he does some sort of undesireable behavior that I have asked him to do such as clean up his toys or sit still in the cart. These behaviors do not occur naturally in children, and we are asking them to do them to fit into our molds. What I don't do is make it a big deal. "Let's go to the store. If you sit quietly in the cart, you can choose a box of crackers from the cracker isle. If not, then we will leave without crackers." Then it is his choice. I tell him beforehand what the desired behavior is, what the end result will be, and he can choose what he does. Talk about giving a child power! This teaches him that he has absolute power in his environment to make choices about how he behaves and what happens as a result.

As for the power difference this evokes... I am a not spanking, loving, caring, momma who absolutely, without a doubt, wants my kiddo to know that I have power over him.

Think whatever you want, but I think the world has gone all kinds of crazy when parents start wanting their kiddos to be their equals.

 

[transylvania_mom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by churndash I don't see any difference between bribes and rewards. They are both offers of material goods or services in order to induce a certain kind of behavior. Using the example of the grocery store - I have never promised my children anything to make them behave in the store. I just expected them to behave, and they did.

:

 

[Serendipity]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Landover These things always crack me up. Sorry... I am a college prof turned stay at home mom and have read (and taught) Kohn out the wazoo as well as teaching applied behavioral analysis from a strict behavioral persective. The "power dichotomoy" always makes me giggle a little too. Here's the way I see it. Human nature works off of behavioral rewards. Humans, in general, will structure their environment in order to earn rewards. If one is alone on an island, they will structure it so that their behavior is rewarded in some way. Heck, I gave myself an M&M everytime I finished a paragraph on my dissertation. I absolutely give my kiddo some sort of reward when he does some sort of undesireable behavior that I have asked him to do such as clean up his toys or sit still in the cart. These behaviors do not occur naturally in children, and we are asking them to do them to fit into our molds. What I don't do is make it a big deal. "Let's go to the store. If you sit quietly in the cart, you can choose a box of crackers from the cracker isle. If not, then we will leave without crackers." Then it is his choice. I tell him beforehand what the desired behavior is, what the end result will be, and he can choose what he does. Talk about giving a child power! This teaches him that he has absolute power in his environment to make choices about how he behaves and what happens as a result. As for the power difference this evokes... I am a not spanking, loving, caring, momma who absolutely, without a doubt, wants my kiddo to know that I have power over him. Think whatever you want, but I think the world has gone all kinds of crazy when parents start wanting their kiddos to be their equals.

I don't see how human nature works off rewards at all. The reward system is learned and continued. Like you said, you had to reward yourself to get your work done. That's only in your nature now because you learned it.

I don't think the point is to give the child power, the point is to not continue the cycle of needing to be rewarded for things you ought to be internally motivated to do.

Part of the problem is labeling things as "undesirable" in the first place. If cleaning up and taking care of your things isn't seen as drudgery, there isn't a reason to avoid it or be rewarded when you do them.
My kids don't like shopping so instead of reiterating that shopping is boring and if they suffer through without making me crazy, they'll get rewarded- we find ways of making shopping fun or find ways so they don't have to go.

 

[Dar]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipity I think its only a bribe if you use it to negotiate and get desired behavior or result.

It seems to me, then, that most employment situations would qualify as bribes - "I'll give you $75 if you teach this class for two hours tonight."

Dar

 

[Whistler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serendipity we find ways of making shopping fun or find ways so they don't have to go.

That sounds like a reward to me.

 

[Serendipity]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whistler That sounds like a reward to me.

No way man, having fun while shopping is just part of living happily together, it's not used to manipulate.

Just like cleaning. Listening to music and dancing while we clean up isn't a reward, its just part of the process. And it isn't a tool to 'get them' to do it, it's just part of the experience. If they don't want to participate they don't have to.