On the basis of the existing research, this article will review the noncompliant behaviors of preschool children. Noncompliance to parental requests is one of the most common problem behaviors of preschoolers; it tends to be chronic and to appear in numerous situations throughout the day and significantly affects parent-child relationships. Coping with children’s noncompliance on a daily basis may lead to parental frustration and burnout that often trigger ill-advised parental strategies that may actually have the long-term effect of increasing and preserving the noncompliant behaviors of the child. The study presents two ineffective parental strategies: the use of bribery or benefits (treats) and the use of threats with punishment (tricks), in an effort to gain the child’s cooperation. Behavioral training programs for parents are implemented in order to address the difficulty parents experience in achieving compliance. Such programs are based on the principles of applied behavior analysis. According to this approach, parents, as significant agents of socialization, have a substantial effect on teaching and shaping the various behaviors of their children. This article will describe how children’s noncompliant behavior is analyzed with the applied behavior analysis approach, in the context of ineffective strategies used by parents in response to a child’s refusal. Our contribution to the analysis of parent-child relationships and the proposed parental training program can be a resource for practitioners interested in developing their ability to provide guidance to parents in a precise, tailormade, and effective form.
Keywords: Parental strategiesparentingnoncompliancebehavioral parent trainingapplied behavior analysispreschool children
The ability to set limits and boundaries on children's behaviors is considered one of the most challenging practices for parents ( Taffel, 2012), and parents indeed report that they feel they do not have sufficient knowledge in order to guide their decisions and parental behaviors, especially when it comes to discipline ( Bethell, Peck, & Schor, 2001). Omer ( 2000) defined parental authority as the ability to establish rules and values for the child and to prevent all actions that might harm them. Continual discipline problems may lead to three types of unwanted parental tactics: (a) complementary escalation, in which parents give-in to child demands and refusal ( Baumrind, 1991), (b) reciprocal escalation, in which parents tend to react punitively or violently towards the child ( Forgatch, 1991), and (c) parental oscillation between impulsiveness and submission ( Chamberlain & Patterson, 1995). Inconsistency in parenting, particularly inconsistency in discipline practices, has been linked to children problem behaviors ( Pederson & Fite, 2014). The current article aims to present a successful behavioral parent training program based on Applied Behavior Analysis. For this purpose, the article will explain these concepts and demonstrate their use in the case of two common, ineffective parental strategies called here “trick or treat”, meaning bribes or threats. We will begin with a general discussion of the issue of child noncompliance.
Noncompliance is defined as doing anything other than what has been requested by a parent or other adult authority figure within a specific time frame ( Kalb & Loeber, 2003). Wilder, Allison, Nicholson, Abellon, and Saulnier ( 2010) defined noncompliance as a low level of following instructions that are in the individual's response repertoire. The child’s ability to regulate his behavior and to conform to the caregivers’ demands increases during the second and third years of life. Also, the behavioral expression of noncompliance may change during this period and can be presented by the child in different response topographies. Children develop a sense of autonomy that can be manifested through a period of negativity or increased resistance to parental control. Even if it is suggested that negativity decreases after the third year in a child’s life ( Kuczynski, Kochanska, Radke-Yarrow & Girnius-Brown, 1987), the interaction between respect of authority and resistance to external control represents a continuous theme of parent-child interaction. Indeed, all children are noncompliant at times; however, researchers and parents are most concerned with what has been termed persistent or chronic noncompliance, which is correlated with a number of psychiatric diagnoses later in life ( Kalb & Loeber, 2003). Persistent noncompliance has been consistently rated as a primary reason for referral by parents who seek outpatient behavioral or mental health services ( Forehand, 1981), and for impairing child-adult relations ( Kalb & Loeber, 2003), as well as contributing to maternal depression ( Gross, Shaw, Burwell, & Nagin, 2009) and parent stress levels among foster parents and consequently to foster care displacement ( White et al., 2019). Researchers have experimentally investigated noncompliance and found that noncompliance often begins at an early age and frequently in the home environment ( Hester & Kaiser, 1998; Patterson, DeBaryshe, & Ramsey, 1989). Families of children who are noncompliant often provide inappropriate and inconsistent discipline and poor monitoring of the child’s behavior ( Dishion, Patterson, Stoolmiller, & Skinner, 1991; Reid & Eddy, 1997; Wierson & Forehand, 1994), thus inadvertently modeling and encouraging antisocial behaviors ( Patterson, DeBaryshe, & Ramsey, 1989). Noncompliant behaviors can vary in their style, and can be grouped into four types: (a) passive noncompliance, which occurs when the child ignores the parental instruction or request, (b) simple refusal, which occurs when the child refuses to comply with the parental request, without exhibiting anger or hostility, (c) negotiation, which occurs when the child attempts to compromise with the parental request, to offer alternatives or bargain, and (d) direct defiance, which occurs when the child expresses overt resistance, anger, hostility, or aggression ( Kochanska & Aksan, 1995).
Trick or Treat? An Analysis of Two Parental Strategies
There are two specific parental strategies that are widely used by parents as a response to their children’s noncompliance ( Kavurma et al., 2018). Both parental responses aim to reverse the children’s noncompliance by convincing the children to comply with their original parental requests or instructions after all. The first parental strategy is offering benefits or bribes ("treats"): A parent whose request was refused by the child (with one or more response topographies of refusal) offers the child benefits in order to convince him to comply due to the reinforcers that are promised (e.g., “If you’ll go to the shower you will get extra TV time” or “If you’ll sit down and do your homework I will sit with you and help you”). The second parental strategy is threatening the child with punishment ("tricks"): A parent whose request was refused by the child threatens the child with a punitive result should the noncompliance continue. By explaining the risk of punishment, the parent wishes to convince the child to comply in order to avoid the aversive consequence (e.g., "If you don’t turn off the computer now, you will not get access to it for the next week” or “If you won’t eat the salad, you will not get desert"). Both of the described strategies can be very effective in producing compliance. Offering benefits and rewards can serve as an establishing operation (EO), meaning it increases the frequency of behavior that has been reinforced in the past by the benefit or reward that was offered ( Cooper, 2007b). The problem will be that the behavior being reinforced by this positive reinforcement will be the noncompliant behavior, since the reward was offered immediately after it. In other words, parents tend to
Assuming that the noncompliant behaviors of a child are aversive to his parents, it can be determined that both these parental strategies are maintained by a negative reinforcement, since after applying the bribe or threat the noncompliance is discontinued and thus the parent aversive stimulus is removed. What must be emphasized here is that the skill of complying consists of complying to the request itself, directly. By complying to a request
As can be seen, child non-compliance and ineffective responses by parents create a viscous, negative circle that constantly reinforces itself. The question is how to break this circle so that children may learn the skill of compliance and improve the family climate? This will be discussed in the following section.
Applied Behavior Analysis and Behavioral Parent Training
Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) is a scientific approach for the discovery of environmental variables that reliably influence socially significant behavior and for the development of behavior-changing technology that relies on these discoveries ( Cooper, 2007a). Applied Behavior Analysis assumes that all human behaviors occur within an environmental context and that the environment influences human behavior by stimulus changes that occur prior to the behavior or immediately following it ( Cooper, 2007a). Stimulus changes that occur prior to the behavior and environmental conditions that exist before the behavior occur are called
Behavioral Parent Training (BPT) is an approach for treating children’s problem behaviors, in which parents are trained in the use of behavior modification. Parents are trained in altering their interactions with their child, for the purpose of decreasing problem behaviors and increasing prosocial behaviors ( Kazdin, 1995). A broad range of Behavioral Parent Training programs have been developed to address children's problem behaviors and to improve parenting competencies and parent-child interactions ( Forehand et al., 2013). Behavioral Parent Training programs are based on the principles of Applied Behavior Analysis ( Forehand et al., 2013) and are tailored to change parental behaviors by teaching parents the appropriate use of antecedents and consequences. Researches have shown Behavioral Parent Training (BPT) to be effective in reducing children’s disruptive behavior ( Nixon, 2002). Evaluations of BPT effects on families with children who have behavior disorders found that BPT graduates report significantly less child behavior problems and significantly less disruption to child and family quality of life due to child problem behavior. BPT graduates also report being more effective child behavior change agents in not only stopping child problem behavior, but also in preventing new occurrences and teaching the child appropriate behavior ( Feldman & Werner, 2002; Kazdin et al., 2018; Lee, Niew, Yang, Chen, & Lin, 2012; Menting, Orobio, & Matthys, 2013).
Based on the literature review we will discuss the subject of BPT programs, based on Applied Behavior Analysis for treating children's noncompliance.
BPT seeks to establish a change in social contingencies to a point that children’s prosocial behaviors will obtain parental reinforcement and their aversive behaviors will consistently be punished or ignored ( Serketich & Dumas, 1996). BPT assumes that appropriate and inappropriate behaviors of children are maintained by social agents, most often parents, who provide important cues and consequences for the child's behavior ( Miller & Prinz, 1990). In other words, the BPT approach is based on the basic assumption that parents are a significant environment for their children and therefore have the potential of influencing their behavior, and that at least in some degree they are responsible for shaping and maintaining their children’s behaviors.
Analyses and Findings
BPT has been used to treat a variety of child behavior problems, though it has been primarily employed as a treatment for young children’s noncompliance behaviors. In BPT programs, clinicians teach parents to define behavior problems accurately, implement assessment measures that further define the problem and its intensity, and educate parents in the treatment plans that are appropriate for the problems within their individualized context ( Briesmeister & Schaefer, 1998). The parents are the treatment providers, having to consistently implement the strategies they are taught in the parental training, in their home environment ( Kazdin, 1995). Assuming that behaviors (both desirable and undesirable) are learned and maintained through interactions with the environment ( Cooper, 2007a), there is great importance in identifying and understanding these specific interactions. Noncompliance behaviors can be versatile in nature among children and can be controlled by different environmental variables. A process of functional behavior assessment enables identifying the specific function of each child’s noncompliant behavior and adjusting the intervention aimed at reducing it. Analysis of the three-term contingency of preschool children’s noncompliance to parental instruction considers the
Individualized BPT programs for parents are based on the specific knowledge gained from interviewing the parents and from direct observations of family interactions, and it is this knowledge that makes such programs unique and particularly effective. For example, in such programs parents learn about the great importance of praising and reinforcing the child and especially the timing of the reinforcement. In other words, parents are trained in providing a high level of reinforcers—such as rewards, preferred items, and preferred activities—following proper behavior of cooperation and compliance. At the same time, they also learn to avoid reinforcing non-compliance behaviors. Parents are trained to avoid using threats after non-compliance and instead of threatening the child with punishment, parents learn how to define expectations from the child beforehand and how to provide effective guidance in a way that will decrease the probability that the child will present non-compliance in the first place. Nevertheless, parents still learn the subtle and critical nuances involved in applying punishment and also receive training related to the proper conditions in which to apply punishment as well as the ethical and age-appropriate manner in which to do so, if necessary.
A limitation of the noncompliance construct is that it inherently reflects the conceptualization of the child as a passive recipient of parental influence. In reality, child’s noncompliance must not be seen as an intrapsychic problem of the child or of the parents, but as a result of the multiple interactions between the child, the parents, and other significant family and parental figures in the educational environment of the child. We have to agree that, as a descriptive category, noncompliance offers little scope for describing how children actively function as agents of influence in their own right. If some studies are more focused on children's susceptibility to parental influence, the present study aims to analyze the parental strategies for controlling children's behavior and to identify the appropriate training program for parents. Behavioral Parent Training programs use the principles of Applied Behavior Analysis to analyze the context of children’s non-compliance in the family. Such analysis help therapists provide parents with personally tailored training programs that have proven to be effective in gaining children’s compliance and improving children-parent relations. It is essential to develop trust between staff, child and parents, and reach a clear agreement on the goals of therapy, to avoid the emergence and escalation of noncompliance, which raises difficult clinical, legal and ethical issues.
- Baumrind, D. (1991). Effective parenting during the early adolescent transition. In P. A. Cowan & E. M. Hetherington (Eds.), Advances in family research series.: Family transitions (pp. 111-163). Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Bethell, C., Peck, C., & Schor, E. (2001). Assessing health system provision of well-child care: The promoting healthy development survey. Pediatrics, 107(5), 1084-1094. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.107.5.1084
- Briesmeister, J. M., & Schaefer, C. E. (Eds.). (1998). Handbook of parent training: Parents as co-therapists for children's behavior problems (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
- Chamberlain, P., & Patterson, G. R. (1995). Discipline and child compliance in parenting. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Applied and practical parenting (Vol. 4, pp. 205-225). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Cooper, J. O. (2007a). Basic concepts. In T. E. Heron (Ed.), Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed., international ed., pp. 24-46). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Merrill-Prentice Hall.
- Cooper, J. O. (2007b). Motivating operations. In T. E. Heron (Ed.), Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed., international ed., pp. 374-391). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson/Merrill-Prentice Hall.
- Dishion, T. J., Patterson, G. R., Stoolmiller, M., & Skinner, M. L. (1991). Family, school, and behavioral antecedents to early adolescent involvement with antisocial peers. Developmental Psychology, 27(1), 172-180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-16184.108.40.206
- Feldman, M. A., & Werner, S. E. (2002). Collateral effects of behavioral parent training on families of children with developmental disabilities and behavior disorders. Behavioral Interventions, 17(2), 75-83. https://doi.org/10.1002/bin.109.abs
- Forehand, R. L. (1981). Helping the noncompliant child: A clinician’s guide to parent training. New York: The Guilford Press.
- Forehand, R., Jones, D. J., & Parent, J. (2013). Behavioral parenting interventions for child disruptive behaviors and anxiety: What's different and what's the same. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(1), 133-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.10.010
- Forgatch, M. S. (1991). The clinical science vortex: A developing theory of antisocial behavior. In D. J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.), The development and treatment of childhood aggression (pp. 291-315). Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Gross, H. E., Shaw, D. S., Burwell, R. A., & Nagin, D. S. (2009). Transactional processes in child disruptive behavior and maternal depression: A longitudinal study from early childhood to adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 21(1), 139-156. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579409000091
- Hester, P. P., & Kaiser, A. P. (1998). Early intervention for the prevention of conduct disorder: Research issues in early identification, implementation, and interpretation of treatment outcome. Behavioral Disorders, 24(1), 57-65. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874299802400105
- Kalb, L., & Loeber, R. (2003). Child disobedience and noncompliance: A review. Pediatrics, 111(3), 641-652.
- Kavurma, C., Bayram, E., Ozbek, A., & Hiz, S. A. (2018). 'My child doesn't eat!'; parental feeding strategies, parental attitudes and family functioning of children with poor appetite. Journal of Basic and Clinical Health Sciences, 2(1), 20-24. https://doi.org/10.30621/jbachs.201
- Kazdin, A. E. (Ed.). (1995). Conduct disorders in childhood and adolescence. London, England: Sage.
- Kazdin, A. E., Glick, A., Pope, J., Kaptchuk, T. J., Lecza, B., Carrubba, E., . . . Hamilton, N. (2018). Parent management training for conduct problems in children: Enhancing treatment to improve therapeutic change. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 18(2), 91-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.12.002
- Kochanska, G., & Aksan, N. (1995). Mother-child mutually positive affect: The quality of child compliance to requests and prohibitions, and maternal control as correlates of early internalization. Child Development, 66(1), 236-254. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131203
- Kuczynski, L., Kochanska, G., Radke-Yarrow, M., & Girnius-Brown, O. (1987). A developmental interpretation of young children's noncompliance. Developmental Psychology, 23(6), 799-806. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-16220.127.116.119
- Lee, P., Niew, W., Yang, H., Chen, V. C., & Lin, K. (2012). A meta-analysis of behavioral parent training for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Research in Developmental Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 33(6), 2040-2049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.05.011
- Menting, A. T. A., Orobio, D. C., & Matthys, W. (2013). Effectiveness of the Incredible Years parent training to modify disruptive and prosocial child behavior: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(8), 901-913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2013.07.006
- Miller, G. E., & Prinz, R. J. (1990). Enhancement of social learning family interventions for childhood conduct disorder. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.291
- Nixon, R. D. V. (2002). Treatment of behavior problems in preschoolers: A review of parent training programs. Clinical Psychology Review, 22(4), 525-546. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-7358(01)00119-2
- Omer, H. (2000). Shikum hasamchut hahorit [Restoring Parental Authority]. Tel-Aviv: Modan
- Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., & Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior. American Psychologist, 44(2), 329-335. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.2.329
- Pederson, C., & Fite, P. (2014). The impact of parenting on the associations between child aggression subtypes and oppositional defiant disorder symptoms. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 45(6), 728-735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-014-0441-y
- Reid, J. B., & Eddy, J. M. (1997). The prevention of antisocial behavior: Some considerations in the search for effective interventions. In D. M. Stoff, J. Breiling, & J. D. Maser (Eds.), Handbook of antisocial behavior (pp. 343-356). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
- Serketich, W. J., & Dumas, J. E. (1996). The effectiveness of behavioral parent training to modify antisocial behavior in children: A meta-analysis. Behavior Therapy, 27(2), 171-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(96)80013-X
- Taffel, R. (2012). Yes, our kids really do want us to set limits. Work & Family Life, 26(11), 5.
- White, L., Delaney, R., Pacifici, C., Nelson, C., Dickinson, S. L., & Golzarri-Arroyo, L. (2019). Understanding and parenting children's noncompliant behavior: The efficacy of an online training workshop for resource parents. Children and Youth Services Review, 99, 246-256.
- Wierson, M., & Forehand, R. (1994). Parent behavioral training for child noncompliance: Rationale, concepts, and effectiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3(5), 146-150. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10770643
- Wilder, D. A., Allison, J., Nicholson, K., Abellon, O. E., & Saulnier, R. (2010). Further evaluation of antecedent interventions on compliance: The effects of rationales to increase compliance among preschoolers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(4), 601-613. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2010.43-601
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
17 June 2020
Print ISBN (optional)
Teacher, teacher training, teaching skills, teaching techniques, special education, children with special needs
Cite this article as:
Matalon, C., & Turliuc, M. N. (2020). Children’s Noncompliance, Ineffective Parental Strategies, And Therapeutic Solutions. In V. Chis (Ed.), Education, Reflection, Development – ERD 2019, vol 85. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 302-309). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2020.06.30