Reciprocal Versus Coercive Interactions

Deposit Love Into the Love Bank

Photo by Kyle Nieber on Unsplash

Gerald Patterson (1926-2016), was the founder of the Oregon Social Learning Center located in Eugene Oregon. A researcher, he investigated interactions among family members and how those interactions affected family life. A professor in the psychology department at the University of Oregon, he was one of the truely great psychologists of the 20th century. Today, I’d like to discuss some important results of his research that you may find useful.

Gerald Patterson

Patterson sent observers into homes to observe how parents and children interact with each other. He also investigated how certain interactions benefitted family life and how others were detrimental. He discussed two types of interactions. The first type, reciprocal interactions, were recorded when person 1 purposely reinforced person 2 because of something person 2 did (e.g., “Oh sweetie, this turkey sure tastes great.”). The second type, coercive interactions, were recorded when person 1 behaved in an aversive fashion toward person 2 only to become pleasant after person 2 did what person 1 wanted.

In a coercive interaction, for example, the parent yells and nags to get the child to get dressed and ready for school. The parent doesn’t stop yelling and nagging until the child complies fully and is in the car. Here the child is reinforced for compliance by silence (no yelling or nagging) and the parent is reinforced for nagging when the child complies. The coercive relationship is an example of aversive control. Parent-child interactions worsen (Paterson 1992).

Coercive interactions work the other way too. Four-year-old Johnny becomes aversive and stops behaving obnoxiously only after his mother, Mary, does what Johnny wants. For example, John screams for a toy and stops screaming only after the parent, Mary, provides the toy. The moment Mary gives John the toy John is reinforced for screaming. The moment John stops screaming Mary is reinforced for ‘giving Johnny the toy’ by John’s silence. Subsequently, Johnny screams more often to control Mary, and Mary gives in more often to obtain John’s silence. Parent-child interactions worsen.

It is easy to see how these concepts apply also to adult-adult interactions where one person is the aggressor and the other ‘gives in’ to demands; or amongst teenagers where one older student bullies a younger one to obtain compliance.

Reciprocal interactions occur when Johnny behaves well, Mary observes the good behavior and praises John, for example, getting dressed for school without prompting. The praise immediately reinforces the response class of getting dressed behaviors and increases the chances the child will behave well in the future. The child’s behavior improves further, thereby reinforcing the parent for praising the child. Parent-child interactions improve. The relationship is based on positive reciprocal interactions. The more positive reciprocal interactions in a family the happier family members will be.

Remember, the child’s behavior affects the parent while the parent’s behavior affects the child. The child is not the only one affected by consequences. Parent behaviors are affected by consequences too.

Avoid Aversive Control

People who purposely or inadvertently use aversive control are avoided by those they punish. Punishment breeds counterattack and revenge. The punished become emotional and anxious. Understandably, they are hurt and upset. They avoid, they escape situations where they are likely punished. These effects damage adult-adult, parent-child, and teacher-child relations. Also, punishment does not teach the person what to do, only what not to do. The escape, the avoidance, and the counterattack make it all the more difficult for your child to be motivated to participate in whatever activity you are trying to complete with your child.

To help mitigate these effects of punishment, reinforcement for ‘good’ behavior, (i.e., the number of reciprocal interactions) must occur at least 3-5 times more often than coercive interactions. According to Paterson, the majority of interactions he observed in typical homes were reciprocal. In families where coercive interactions were more frequent than reciprocal, the probability of anti-social behavior increased (Paterson 1992).

Increase Reciprocal Interactions

Consider, ways to increase reciprocal interactions in your household. Try to catch children being good with praise and attention. Find shared activities that are fun and create reciprocal interactions spontaneously. Follow low probability behaviors with preferred activities as ways to improve compliance e.g. when you put on your shoes we will go outside on the swings.

Have methods for your children to earn the things and activities they desire - within reason. Provide allowances or point systems for doing specific chores around the house so they can earn the things they like. If friends are going skiing or ice skating have your child earn the trip. Don’t just give them their desired items and activities for free, that is, noncontingently. When reinforcers are provided noncontingently ‘good’ behaviors may occur less often, and behavior problems tend to worsen.

It is unreasonable to expect parents to reinforce every good deed every time it occurs. In practice people reinforce intermittently. And not every reward or gift must be made contingent. But it’s a good idea to have a reinforcement system in your home aimed at reinforcing the ‘good’ behaviors you want to see in your child’s repertoire.

How To Handle Misbehavior

Reinforce the behavior (s) you want your child to display, instead of punishing misbehavior. Let’s say your child rarely completes his homework. You decide to set up a reward/punishment program: if he does his assigned homework he obtains 1 hour playing video games. If he doesn’t complete his homework, you provide no time for video games that day. Soon he’s doing his homework almost every day. You are happy. He is happy.

Because the problem seems solved many parents gradually stop making the reinforcer (e.g., video game play) contingent upon homework. Suppose access to the reinforcer (video game) was the reason he was motivated to do his homework and now the parents provide the game regardless of whether he completes his homework or not. In that case, the child will gradually stop doing his homework. Since homework is not generally inherently reinforcing it is wise to make homework contingent upon some form of reinforcement program ( e.g., points, reinforcer menu, privileges) and let it evolve as the child matures so that it remains age-appropriate.

Maintaining extrinsic reward/point systems forces a parent to have more frequent reciprocal interactions with their children, thereby improving positive feelings within the family. Think of it this way: each reciprocal interaction drops love into the love bank.

Natural Reinforcers versus Extrinsic Reinforcers

It is unlikely but let’s pretend that natural reinforcers alone are currently maintaining Johnny’s homework, (e.g., using math and reading skills to gain desired information). If that is so, homework behaviors will be maintained and will not be reduced in frequency, even if the extrinsic rewards (time playing video games) are no longer used. If he is reading because he enjoys the story or because he is getting the information he seeks, the providing / not providing video games contingency will be unnecessary.

On the other hand, if he is reading not because he enjoys the story, not because he is acquiring information he desires, but because you are paying him with video game time, then once the extrinsic reinforcers stop, the reading will stop. Plus, there are all kinds of other competing more reinforcing items and activities to do instead. There are also competing reinforcers such as approval from friends and social media that may work against you if you don’t have a reinforcement program at home.

A better strategy is to continue a reinforcement program until your child acquires the self-help skills, social skills, study skills, proficiency, and persistence to come in contact with the more natural reinforcers that maintain the behavior of most people who are not living with their parents under a point program. The goal is to gradually reduce the external reinforcement programs as more natural consequences come to maintain Johnny’s behavior.

How To Use Reinforcers and Mild Punishers Effectively

I am talking about relatively mild punishers, such as a 5-10 minute work detail, removing stars or points, losing privileges, and so on, which would occur if the child, for example: threw a block cracking the TV; or fought with his brother.. In general, you want to observe and reinforce the behaviors you are teaching and provide mild consequences for misbehavior.

1. Do not use any aversive event as a punisher that causes pain or trauma. It’s not necessary. It is considered child abuse.

2. Design a reinforcement program for ‘good behavior’ to mitigate the unwanted effects of punishment. Only reinforcement teaches the person what to do.

3. Deliver the punishing consequence (e.g., 5-10 minute work detail) for misbehavior as soon as possible after the behavior occurs. Don’t wait before delivering the consequence. Washing the car on Saturday for something that occurred on Monday is ineffective. A small immediate consequence is more effective than a larger delayed consequence.

4. Short-time limited consequences are recommended instead of consequences that last hours or days. For a young child, a brief nonexclusionary time out (or sit & watch) of 30-60 calm seconds or so is recommended. One to two minutes of calm sit & watch for an elementary school-aged child is sufficient. For a child 9 years old and older a 5-10-minute work detail is recommended, such as: take out the trash, water house plants, set the table, vacuum the living room, change the sheets on his bed - are all good examples of work details.

5. Increasing or decreasing your child’s freedom and privileges contingent upon his behavior is an excellent way to provide consequences to teens. Have Johnny earn his privileges each day across a week’s time and only remove a privilege for one day as a consequence of misbehavior. Don’t remove any privilege for a week - 24 hours or less is fine.

6. Do not threaten to punish the child if his behavior doesn’t improve. If the child is misbehaving deliver the consequence, don’t threaten and not deliver. Or do nothing. It’s better to do nothing than threaten. Sometimes ignoring your child’s behavior (I can think of whining) is exactly what you should do.

7. Response Cost is an effective procedure for elementary and high school children. Put 4 or 5 magnetic stars on the refrigerator. If the child misbehaves (e.g., curses at his sister), take 1 star away. If he uses curse words again, take another star away. When all the stars are gone the child loses a privilege (cell phone, iPad, video game) for one day only. The next day the stars are reinstated and the program begins again.

8. A child should understand the contingencies (rules) in effect. By understand I mean to be able to articulate the rules. If I do this, that will happen. Regardless, reinforcement and punishment work with young children who do not speak and cannot articulate the contingencies. Reinforcement and punishment work with animals who cannot articulate the contingencies. Nevertheless, the program will be more effective if the child can tell you what the contingencies (rules) are. If the child is too young to tell you the rules, wait until he or she can.

   Sources:

   I discussed only a portion of Patterson’s research. To learn more about Gerald Patterson’s work and the work of the Oregon Social Learning Center visit: https://www.oslc.org/resources/?audience=clinicians

   Patterson, G., Reid, J., Dishion, T., A Social Interactional Approach, Volume 4: Antisocial Boys Castalia Publishing Company, Eugene OR (1992)