It seems closely related to the technique where, to stop them doing something you don’t want them to do, you encourage them to do something else that prevents them from doing the first thing. (There’s a snappy name for this that I’ve forgotten.) So, for example, stopping them from bothering another child by getting them interested in an entirely different activity.
But the idea of the positive opposite really is to reward specific oppotite behavior. Not to divert from a problematic activity by distracting with other behaviors.
I long believed distraction to avoid solving the original problem and it may actually reward the problematic behavior. So I’m still not convinced distraction works.
I find similar techniques help with my children.
It seems closely related to the technique where, to stop them doing something you don’t want them to do, you encourage them to do something else that prevents them from doing the first thing. (There’s a snappy name for this that I’ve forgotten.) So, for example, stopping them from bothering another child by getting them interested in an entirely different activity.
Do you mean what Kazdin calls the “positive opposite”? I wrote a review here:
http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/jzg/book_review_kazdins_the_everyday_parenting_toolkit/
But the idea of the positive opposite really is to reward specific oppotite behavior. Not to divert from a problematic activity by distracting with other behaviors.
I long believed distraction to avoid solving the original problem and it may actually reward the problematic behavior. So I’m still not convinced distraction works.