Affiliated University
The mother intends to change her children's level of consumption of peas. She hopes to make her children want more of that commodity than the current quantity. The mother wants to influence her children's appetitive behavior (Pittman, 2009).
The mother uses positive reinforcement to shift her children's level of peas’ consumption from low to high level. Positive reinforcement is evident because the child who shows a higher affinity for peas receives a reward. On the other hand, the child who maintains a constant or even lower level of appetite does not receive any reward. There is no direct negative consequence to the child whose appetite does not improve. Therefore, the mother is not using negative reinforcement.
Positive reinforcement works for one child and fails to improve the other's appetitive behavior because both of them have different nature. Each child probably has different interests in life. Therefore, it is likely that one child likes peas, but the other does not like them. Another reason why positive reinforcement works for one child and not the other is that the mother uses one element for positive reinforcement, for instance, money. The child whose appetite increased probably likes it whereas the one whose level does not improve has no interest in, money.
The mother should use two different elements to reward her children. She should ensure that the positive reinforcements meet the individual interest of every child. It would be unlikely for her efforts to look biased. Another means of positive reinforcement is to improve the quality of her product, in this case, the peas. If she were to use spices on the peas, then her children will respond better to the meals. A means of negative reinforcement is to deny the children something that interests them, say electronics until they increase their level of consumption.
Reference
Pittman, J. E. (2009). 21st century issues in America: An introduction to public administration theory and practice. Bloomington, IN: Author House.
