Praise good behavior: what’s wrong with saying good girl or good boy?
We know that, in child development, we should criticize the action, not the actor. Telling a child that he or she is a bad girl or boy is avoided because it is detrimental to the child’s sense of self-esteem. the comment, You are bad, You’re naughty, You’re stupid, gradually leaves its mark on the child’s identity. Rather, we say that a certain behavior is useless or harmful, disruptive or destructive, not that the child is bad for exhibiting that behavior. Similarly, we should not attribute negative motives to the child. Calling a child’s actions malicious, vindictive, or thoughtless is another way, a little more subtle but no less damaging for that, of condemning the child rather than the behavior.
We should apply the same principles to behavior considered good. Praising the boy instead of her behavior is equally useless to the boy; it is the other side of the same coin. Rather we should praise behavior.
Very often, behavior is praiseworthy not because of its intrinsic value but because the praised behavior is simply what the parent or caregiver wants the child to do. The only ‘good’ quality of behavior is that he is doing what he is told. Is this really good? I can think of many contexts where doing what you are told is far from good behavior. In an extreme example, it was the defense of Nazi war criminals, rejected by the Nuremberg court. In more everyday contexts, doing what one is told is usually commendable only by the authorities giving the directive. Doing what the boss says may help you keep his job, but it’s not good in and of itself.
Doing what you are told can easily violate other principles, such as acting in your best interests, acting in accordance with your values, acting in accordance with the principle of the greatest good, or any other value or principle. If you’re good at all, doing what you’re told is pretty low on the list of goods. Complimenting a child for doing what we say and, as is often the case, doing it repeatedly, reinforces the message that obedience is a much more valuable principle than most of us realize.
On the much rarer occasions when behavior that is considered good is praised not because the child is obeying a directive but, for example, when the behavior is helpful to someone else or shows thoughtfulness, skill, or intelligence, tell the child that is good is markedly useless. If the behavior is reflexive, instead say: That was a very thoughtful thing to do.; if it was useful, say, That was a very useful thing to do … I think you get the idea. Being specific about the quality of an action is much more helpful to the child than the vague description of Okay. The vague and indiscriminate use of the word actually undermines the concept.
Furthermore, calling the child good for certain behaviors makes the adult the arbiter of what is good and what is not good. It is better for the child to learn through guidance and the consequences of her behavior and determine for himself what is good or not. What is good behavior or not, I am suggesting, is related to the consequences of the behavior. The behavior is not good or bad in itself.
It is certainly true that children have to do what they are told much, much more often than they would like. It is certainly good for us and good for them that they do what the adults tell them. But easy acquiescence or compliance is not a mark of good character. Praising behavior we would say, for example, Washing the dishes was very helpful, thank you.; Prayed, I really appreciated when you said ‘thank you’. Identify the commendable behavior and express what was commendable about it.
The word Okay it is not a neutral description; It has a moral dimension. In fact, the moral dimension is the largest part of the concept of good. When a child is called Good Guy Prayed girlhis soul is being commended.
What is the implication when the child does not do what the parent or caregiver wants them to do? What is the result when behavior that would have been declared good does not show up and receives disapproval instead of praise? If the child does what the father wants, he is fine; when the child does what the child wants it is bad. At least she’s not good. What a conflict for a child. What I want is not good; what the caregiver wants is good: what should I do? Either way, I feel bad. Doing good is equal to feeling bad. Very confusing. From this perspective, the world seems very complicated and unwelcoming.
In fact, it often happens that a child who has just been described as good does something bad, without any apparent provocation. This is very confusing to the caregiver who has just praised the child’s soul. But the boy is demonstrating honesty. She knows that she is not good. She remembers all the bad things she has done, many of which the caretaker doesn’t even know about. The good description is undeserved. You’d better prove it right away; it is honest to do so. It would be wrong to accept this praise when she doesn’t deserve it. So she does something that is both good and bad: good because it’s a show of honesty; bad because it is a deliberately negative act of evil. All this confusion would have been avoided if she had praised the behavior instead of the person.
Of course, the child’s noncompliant behavior can be infuriating to the parent, and the parent can express this. But the message is not that the child is bad for not doing what the father wants and good when he does what the father wants, but rather that the father is exasperated when he does not do what the father wants. This is a completely different message. It may be helpful for the child to accept the parents’ wishes, because there are consequences for disobeying. But the problem is not moral and has nothing to do with the morality of the child. Social and parental expectation should not be confused with morality. Self-esteem should not depend on conformity and obedience.
(c) Jonathan LivingstoneJuly 29, 2010