Discuss the use of conditioning techniques to control the behaviour of children, including ethical
and social implications [20]
The controversy regarding the use of conditioning techniques to control behaviour stems
largely from the fact that arguably the use of conditioning inhibits free will- in fact B.F.Skinner,
a pioneer of the behaviourist approach said we don’t actually have free will. However, used
carefully, conditioning techniques can be hugely beneficial for children, as well as their parents
and teachers, and as with any intervention, the best interests of the child should be the end
goal.
The term ‘conditioning’ may seem extreme, however parents often use the techniques anyway
without the label. When a child has their favourite toy taken away because they have been
naughty, they learn that they will have a negative consequence from the bad behaviour, this is
operant conditioning using negative (taking something away) punishment. A study by Gill (1998)
found that children who were encouraged by the rewarding or postponement of pocket money
performed 20% of household chores, which shows that operant conditioning can have a positive
impact and increase positive behavior in the home. Further, by offering a reward as opposed to
just a punishment, the parent is arguably maintaining a better relationship as the child is not
constantly motivated by fear of punishment for doing something wrong, but by a desire from
praise. The standout issue with conditioning techniques in the home is that without consistency
they won’t be effective, and for a busy parent it is not always practical or easy to be absolutely
consistent. The stressful life of a parent can mean that occasionally they may become angry or
frustrated with their child and not behave as they ‘should’ according to behaviourist principles.
Additionally, Huesmann et al. (2003) highlighted the importance of a child understanding the
contingency of actions and consequences, in other words the way in which they are related
otherwise there could be confusion which only perpetuates the bad behaviour. This means that
punishment should follow immediately after to ensure the link is made, which is nigh on
impossible as it would mean children are watched 24 hours of the day. Clearly conditioning
techniques used in the home can be beneficial, however only truly when there is a balance of
reward and punishment, and when parents are unwavering in their techniques.
Conditioning techniques are also heavily used is in schools, where teachers will often use gold
stars, merits and house points to encourage hard work and overall good beahviour. The main
argument against the use of conditioning in schools is that it can actually be detrimental to a
child’s learning by diminishing intrinsic motivation. Lepper et al. (1973) showed that nursery age
children who were motivated by a reward did not work as hard as those who were simply asked
to perform a task well. This suggests that if a reward is promised a child is inclined to achive the
reward as quickly as possible rather than being inclined to simply do their best. In Japanese
primary school systems, reward systems are rarely used yet children are motivated and achive
fantastic results anyway, possibly because their intrinsic motivation is fully intact. That said, in
certain circumstances conditioning techniques do work in schools, McAllister et al. (1969) found
that an increased use of teacher praise and disapproval reduced the amount of inappropriate
talking. Perhaps in schools it would be best for conditioning techniques to be aimed towards
those children who don’t have a high intrinsic motivation and who would benefit from a degree
of teacher validation.
Ethical issues of conditioning techniques arise predominantly when older children begin to feel
they are being manipulated, bribed or even threatened which can lead to distrust in authority
figures, or a misconception of how people should be treated when we want something from
them. Essentially children are being manipulated when they are promised a reward, and while
this may work for very young children who are given a lollypop for putting their toys away, it
could be detrimental to teenagers who behave badly as a result of some deep rooted issue. Not
all behaviours can be ‘fixed’ simply with the threat of punishment, with particularly problematic
children or those with certain learning difficulties often needing someone to listen to them and
why they do what they do, and perhaps even some sort of treatment.
Overall, the use of conditioning techniques to control the behaviour of children can be a useful
resource when applied carefully and consistently. In schools, younger children can be
encouraged and nudged towards positive behaviours with some rewards, however conditioning
shouldn’t be relied on solely, with more long term, individulised interventions perhaps more
suitable for older children or those with more complex needs.
and social implications [20]
The controversy regarding the use of conditioning techniques to control behaviour stems
largely from the fact that arguably the use of conditioning inhibits free will- in fact B.F.Skinner,
a pioneer of the behaviourist approach said we don’t actually have free will. However, used
carefully, conditioning techniques can be hugely beneficial for children, as well as their parents
and teachers, and as with any intervention, the best interests of the child should be the end
goal.
The term ‘conditioning’ may seem extreme, however parents often use the techniques anyway
without the label. When a child has their favourite toy taken away because they have been
naughty, they learn that they will have a negative consequence from the bad behaviour, this is
operant conditioning using negative (taking something away) punishment. A study by Gill (1998)
found that children who were encouraged by the rewarding or postponement of pocket money
performed 20% of household chores, which shows that operant conditioning can have a positive
impact and increase positive behavior in the home. Further, by offering a reward as opposed to
just a punishment, the parent is arguably maintaining a better relationship as the child is not
constantly motivated by fear of punishment for doing something wrong, but by a desire from
praise. The standout issue with conditioning techniques in the home is that without consistency
they won’t be effective, and for a busy parent it is not always practical or easy to be absolutely
consistent. The stressful life of a parent can mean that occasionally they may become angry or
frustrated with their child and not behave as they ‘should’ according to behaviourist principles.
Additionally, Huesmann et al. (2003) highlighted the importance of a child understanding the
contingency of actions and consequences, in other words the way in which they are related
otherwise there could be confusion which only perpetuates the bad behaviour. This means that
punishment should follow immediately after to ensure the link is made, which is nigh on
impossible as it would mean children are watched 24 hours of the day. Clearly conditioning
techniques used in the home can be beneficial, however only truly when there is a balance of
reward and punishment, and when parents are unwavering in their techniques.
Conditioning techniques are also heavily used is in schools, where teachers will often use gold
stars, merits and house points to encourage hard work and overall good beahviour. The main
argument against the use of conditioning in schools is that it can actually be detrimental to a
child’s learning by diminishing intrinsic motivation. Lepper et al. (1973) showed that nursery age
children who were motivated by a reward did not work as hard as those who were simply asked
to perform a task well. This suggests that if a reward is promised a child is inclined to achive the
reward as quickly as possible rather than being inclined to simply do their best. In Japanese
primary school systems, reward systems are rarely used yet children are motivated and achive
fantastic results anyway, possibly because their intrinsic motivation is fully intact. That said, in
certain circumstances conditioning techniques do work in schools, McAllister et al. (1969) found
that an increased use of teacher praise and disapproval reduced the amount of inappropriate
talking. Perhaps in schools it would be best for conditioning techniques to be aimed towards
those children who don’t have a high intrinsic motivation and who would benefit from a degree
of teacher validation.
Ethical issues of conditioning techniques arise predominantly when older children begin to feel
they are being manipulated, bribed or even threatened which can lead to distrust in authority
figures, or a misconception of how people should be treated when we want something from
them. Essentially children are being manipulated when they are promised a reward, and while
this may work for very young children who are given a lollypop for putting their toys away, it
could be detrimental to teenagers who behave badly as a result of some deep rooted issue. Not
all behaviours can be ‘fixed’ simply with the threat of punishment, with particularly problematic
children or those with certain learning difficulties often needing someone to listen to them and
why they do what they do, and perhaps even some sort of treatment.
Overall, the use of conditioning techniques to control the behaviour of children can be a useful
resource when applied carefully and consistently. In schools, younger children can be
encouraged and nudged towards positive behaviours with some rewards, however conditioning
shouldn’t be relied on solely, with more long term, individulised interventions perhaps more
suitable for older children or those with more complex needs.
