Yesterday we showed you a video of a father doing Reverse psychology to a child, exchanging noes and yeses until the moment when the father manages to change the child's yes for a no. As I said yesterday, it is a very basic example of reverse psychology that does not serve to define it, but rather to show that it exists.
As I find an interesting topic, today we will talk a little more about reverse psychology, a technique that is used with both children and adults. To exemplify it I have added to the title of the entry a "don't read this entry", because the most logical consequence is that you read it.
What is reverse psychology?
The Reverse psychology It is a technique described by Viktor Frankl, psychiatrist and writer, who used to ask his patients more unstable or with more problems: "Why don't you commit suicide?" At that time people imagined the event and found a reason not to do so, from which Frankl began to work to subject his patients to that motive that clung to life.
It is a subtle behaviorist technique that tries to get an effect on another person making him believe that you want me to do something that you don't really want. Success lies in what is called psychological resistance, which is the difficulty we put into doing something that is imposed on us, that they send us or ask us when we feel that doing so affects our freedom or autonomy.
Thanks to this resistance people tend to do the opposite of what they are told, simply to show that they are free to choose, autonomous in the decision and able to take their own path.
It does not always work and in the end it is more or less criticizable because it is a manipulation technique, but there are many people who use it with children and adults and I think it can be useful and curious to know some examples to know how it works.
An example of how reverse psychology works with adults at work
In my company they give a lot of value to training and offer 35 hours a year for anyone who wants to take courses, attend congresses, etc. As the workers do not usually spend them and seem not to take advantage of them, the company decides to pass a circular in which it explains to all the workers that "for economic reasons it has been decided to eliminate the hours of training".
The workers, in the face of such injustice, complain, decide to meet and begin to plan what to do to claim their 35 hours ("so much that they said training is important and now it turns out that they take it away"). The company and the workers negotiate in a more or less intense way, that is, the company refuses, insists that the economy is very bad, decides to propose 10 hours of training per year only for certain workers, etc. In the end, the company gives in and decides that given the pressure of the workers and seeing that it is so important for them, it again provides 35 hours for everyone.
The situation is the same as before making the circular public, but now the workers value the 35 hours of training much more and by inertia they begin to sign up for courses: "Now that we have achieved what we wanted, our 35 hours, we have to take advantage of them."
An example of how reverse psychology works with children
Now we are going to focus on the protagonists of the blog, children, so you can see how we use reverse psychology with children (or how can we use it).
There are fathers and mothers who usually offer rewards to children to do certain things: "If you read two pages of a book, I let you watch TV for an hour." The children they understand this way that watching television is a good thing, something they aspire to, something fun and ultimately something they should get. further they understand that reading a book is boring, because we must reward him to do it ("uff, if they have to give me a prize to do it, it is because it is a roll") and in addition those parents tend to reinforce these messages day by day, by repeating the prize or by conditioning the Reading to a later prize.
It follows that if what we want is for children to read and watch less television, we must apply the Reverse psychology, making them believe that the fun is to read and how boring it is to watch television: "if you watch television at least one hour you can read two pages of this book". In this way, you will only be allowed to read two pages of a story or book if (and only if) it is an hour in front of the television. The first day will pass and you probably won't even remember the book. Then you go and tell him "the time has passed, very good! You can read two pages of the book ... but only two!" The child will read them strangely and, when he has read them, you take the book and take it with you: "Tomorrow, if you watch television for an hour, you can read two more pages."
As the days go by, the child will be more attentive to the time that passes than to what they put on television and He will be eager to take the book so special that Mom has, from which he can only read two pages per day.
As it is not about torturing children, you can negotiate with them so that the time decreases ("ok, come, thirty minutes is enough") and increasing the number of pages ("come, today you can read five"), until that we see that the child values reading without tricks in the middle: "Do what you want today, honey. I bought you a new book and I was going to let you read only a little if you watched television, but I thought the best thing is do what you prefer. If you want to watch TV do it, and if you want to read the new book, do it too. " Most likely, the child will throw himself headlong through the book.
This happens because children see that reading the book is limited, that we want them to watch television for a long time (or that we don't care if they do), but that they read very little time, because it is something very good to what they should aspire. They see that reading a book is something exclusive, something available to very few for a short time and then they begin to want it. That's why in the houses where nobody limits the television or the game with the consoles the children end up watching the television or playing with them without obsessions (nobody has made them feel that they are special or different from the rest of toys).
This is an example of how to use a technique to achieve a goal. What should be discussed perhaps is the extent to which such manipulation of children is more or less correct or more or less desirable.
In my house, for example, we use these techniques very little (now I will give you an example) and in the comments about books and television we simply choose to do nothing: nobody gives more importance to anything. The one who wants to watch TV, sees it, the one who wants to read, reads, the one who wants to play the console, does it and the one who wants to play with the toys, plays.
There are no clear limits in this regard and as nothing is limited, nothing is more important than the other options. That's why my children watch TV for a while when they feel like it, usually a few minutes until they decide to do something else, that's why my children play the console obsessively when they have a new game, until they squeeze it and the console is forgotten for weeks and that is why my children spend hours and hours playing toys, moving from one to another as they find it more fun.
Now, when someone has already created certain preferences because they have begun to limit something, it may be a good idea to apply the method mentioned, to try to also appreciate the opposite (which was the one that was intended to be achieved).
With regard to our technique (freedom), surely a doubt will assail you: "but if I leave them freedom, they throw themselves on TV and from there they don't leave." Of course, I explain the film as it happens in my house and with my children and perhaps other children have already created their preferences. In such a case, the solution can go through a slight inverse psychology (not as exaggerated as the example) or by working it out a bit and making the alternatives fun. It would be something like offering them an activity in your company if they are watching television alone: "Are you coming to play something with me?" As normally (at least when they are small), They value our presence more than anything, it doesn't usually fail.
A personal example of a few days ago
08:40 in the morning. We're all going to take Jon to school but he doesn't want to go that day. Telling him that the school is very cool, that he is going to have a great time, he no longer sneaks in ("the more you try to convince me, the more you transmit to me that it really is a roll"), so taking advantage that I have the little brother already dressed, Happy and happy as every morning I say to Jon: "Ok, well, today you don't go to school. Today Aran will go." Jon listens to me thoughtfully and I continue: "Aran, what if you like school? - trap, because the poor man doesn't answer and I know it - well today you go. Let's talk to the teacher so that you let sit on Jon's site ... I think you can go to have fun, as Jon does not want to go, surely you do. "
"No! I'm going! I do want to go to school! I want to go to school!" To all this my wife and I hallucinate because it is a phrase that we have rarely heard. "Well, valeeee ... well today you go, Jon." Then I turn to Aran: "I'm sorry, Aran, but Jon does want to go to school. You'll have to wait until the day you have to go."
And tomorrow, more ...
Tomorrow I bring you some more examples for both adults and children. It is interesting because we can see how we are deceived / deceived and how we can use it in our favor to get things with the children (always in moderation and tomorrow I will explain why).
Photos | WalkingWounded, Glassblower on Flickr On Babies and more | Reverse psychology in childhood
