Are We Teaching Children New Skills, or Just Teaching Them to Work for Rewards?

Why the use of edible reinforcement deserves a closer look

By Dr. Bob Carey

I recently participated in an interesting discussion on WhatsApp with an agency that I consult with about using edible rewards to encourage positive behaviour in children, particularly those who are neurodivergent, have developmental disabilities, and have other learning or behavioural challenges. It got me thinking about something I've wondered about for many years. Just because we can get a child to do something by offering a reward, does that necessarily mean we're going about it in the best possible way?  Now, before anyone gets too excited, let me say right up front that I'm not suggesting there's anything inherently wrong with using edible rewards. In fact, we've known for decades that they can be very effective, especially when we're trying to help children learn new skills that they might otherwise find difficult or uninteresting. Anyone who has worked with children with significant developmental or communication challenges knows that finding something a child really enjoys can sometimes make an enormous difference in getting a learning program off the ground.  But I think there's a bigger question here, and it's one that sometimes gets overlooked in our enthusiasm to find an intervention that works. Are we simply trying to get a child to do what we want, or are we trying to help that child develop the skills, confidence, motivation, and independence that will serve them throughout their lives?  Those two objectives aren't necessarily the same thing.

Think about a young child who has difficulty communicating what they want. Perhaps a therapist discovers that the child loves Smarties and begins offering one whenever the child attempts to use a word, gesture, or picture to make a request. Over time, the child begins communicating more frequently, and everyone is understandably delighted. That's a meaningful accomplishment, and I certainly wouldn't want to minimize it.  But what happens next? Does the child begin using that communication skill at home, at school, or on the playground? Does the child discover that communicating helps other people understand what they need? Does asking for help actually result in someone helping? Does expressing a preference give the child more control over what happens in their day?  Or does the child simply learn that saying a particular word or pointing to a particular picture is a good way to get another Smartie?  There's an important difference between those outcomes, and I think it's one we need to pay much more attention to.

From the perspective of the Positive Systems Approach, which I've written about extensively over the years, children's behaviour doesn't develop in isolation. It develops within a complex network of relationships, expectations, experiences, and environmental circumstances. How children behave is influenced not only by their individual abilities and challenges, but also by how the people and environments around them respond to those abilities and challenges.  That's why I've always felt that we should be putting at least as much energy into making children's environments more positive and reinforcing as we put into finding rewards that will get them to behave in particular ways. 

Consider a child who becomes upset every morning when it's time to get ready for school. Perhaps the parents have tried everything they can think of, including promising a favourite treat if the child gets dressed without complaining. Some mornings it works, and everyone gets out the door on time. Other mornings, even the promise of a treat doesn't seem to make much difference.  It's tempting to conclude that we simply haven't found the right reward, or perhaps that the child needs a bigger incentive. But what if the real problem has very little to do with motivation?  Maybe the child is anxious about something happening at school. Maybe getting dressed is difficult because of sensory sensitivities to certain fabrics. Maybe the morning routine involves too many instructions delivered too quickly. Perhaps the child is tired, overwhelmed, or simply having difficulty making the transition from one activity to another.  Offering a reward might get us through the morning, but it doesn't necessarily address any of those underlying difficulties.  On the other hand, if we take the time to understand what's making the morning so difficult, we might discover that a few relatively simple changes can make an enormous difference. Perhaps we prepare clothing the night before, allow the child more choice, reduce the number of verbal instructions, or build a little more time into the routine. Maybe we need to work with the school to address something that's causing anxiety.  Suddenly, the child's behaviour may begin to improve, not because we've found a more powerful reward, but because we've made the situation easier for the child to manage.  And isn't that what we really want?

There's another aspect of this discussion that I think deserves some attention, and that's the difference between getting children to comply with our expectations and helping them become genuinely competent and independent.  As parents, teachers, and therapists, we naturally want children to cooperate. We want them to follow instructions, participate in activities, learn new skills, and behave in ways that make family life and classroom life run more smoothly. There's nothing unreasonable about those expectations. But I think we occasionally need to ask ourselves whether the behaviours we're trying to encourage are actually helping the child, or whether they're primarily making life easier for the adults. For example, teaching a child to ask for a break when they're overwhelmed is a valuable skill. Teaching a child to remain seated and quiet despite feeling overwhelmed may produce a more manageable classroom, but it doesn't necessarily teach the child how to recognize and communicate their needs. The same outward appearance of cooperation can sometimes tell us very little about what's happening inside the child.  This doesn't mean that expectations are unimportant or that children shouldn't be encouraged to develop persistence, flexibility, and self-control. Quite the contrary. Those are important developmental skills. But we need to teach them in ways that recognize the child's abilities, respect their individual differences, and provide the support necessary for genuine success.

I also think we need to be careful about the messages children receive when food becomes a routine bargaining tool. Most of us have probably found ourselves saying something like, "If you finish your homework, you can have a cookie," or "If you're good at the store, we'll get you a treat." I've certainly heard variations of those statements countless times, and I suspect most parents have used them at one time or another.  I'm not suggesting that the occasional promise of a treat is going to cause some terrible developmental problem. Parenting is complicated enough without making people feel guilty about every little decision they make. But when food becomes the primary way we encourage cooperation, we may be missing opportunities to help children discover other reasons for participating, learning, and succeeding.

There's also a growing body of psychological research suggesting that the relationship between rewards and motivation is more complicated than we once believed. For instance, researchers such as Edward Deci and Richard Ryan (see References below) have spent many years examining how motivation develops and how external rewards can sometimes interfere with people's natural interest in activities. Their findings don't suggest that rewards are always harmful, but they do remind us that the way rewards are used, and the circumstances in which they're provided, can make a considerable difference.  For children who are already interested in an activity, repeatedly offering tangible rewards may sometimes shift their attention away from the enjoyment of the activity itself and toward what they're going to receive for doing it. On the other hand, for a child who is struggling to acquire a difficult new skill, a carefully selected reward may provide just the encouragement needed to get started.  The challenge, I think, is knowing the difference.  And this is where the idea of natural reinforcement becomes so important.

Imagine a child who has been learning to communicate more effectively. Initially, we might use a favourite food or activity to encourage attempts at communication. But as the child becomes more successful, the communication itself should begin producing meaningful results. The child asks for a toy and gets to play with it. They tell someone they're uncomfortable and receive help. They ask another child to join them in a game and discover the pleasure of playing together.  In each of those situations, the environment is responding to the child's developing abilities in ways that make those abilities genuinely useful.  That's a very different experience from simply performing a behaviour because an adult is holding a reward.

Of course, not every child finds the same things rewarding. Some children love praise, attention, and social interaction, while others may prefer quiet recognition, access to a favourite activity, or simply the satisfaction of being able to accomplish something independently. We need to pay attention to those differences rather than assuming that every child should respond to the same forms of encouragement.  In my view, one of the most important things we can do is help children experience success in environments that are supportive, enjoyable, and responsive to their needs. When children feel understood, when expectations are reasonable, when adults notice their efforts, and when they have opportunities to make meaningful choices, we create conditions in which positive behaviour is much more likely to develop naturally.

This doesn't eliminate the need for teaching, structure, or carefully planned interventions. Children with significant developmental challenges may require considerable support to acquire skills that other children learn almost effortlessly. There may be situations where edible reinforcement is an entirely reasonable and effective part of that process. But I would hope that whenever we introduce such a strategy, we're also thinking about how we'll eventually move beyond it.  What will replace the edible reward? How will the child use the new skill in everyday life? What changes can we make to the environment so that the skill becomes useful, enjoyable, and worth repeating without someone constantly providing an incentive?  And perhaps most importantly, how will we know that the child is becoming more capable, more confident, and more independent, rather than simply becoming better at earning rewards?

These are the kinds of questions that lie at the heart of the Positive Systems Approach. Rather than focusing exclusively on changing the child's behaviour, PSA encourages us to examine the many individual and environmental factors that contribute to that behaviour. It asks us to consider what the child needs, what the adults around the child can do differently, and how we can create everyday experiences that promote healthy development.  For parents, I think something is reassuring about this perspective. It means we don't always have to come up with another reward, another consequence, or another clever strategy to get our children to cooperate. Sometimes the most helpful thing we can do is change the way we're approaching the situation, adjust our expectations, or take a little more time to understand what our child is experiencing. And when rewards are useful, we can use them thoughtfully, without allowing them to become the whole intervention.  After all, our goal isn't simply to raise children who know how to earn treats. It's to help them become individuals who can communicate their needs, manage challenges, enjoy relationships, experience success, and participate as fully as possible in the world around them.  Because, when you think about it, we're not going to be following these kids around for the rest of their lives with a bag of Smarties in our pockets!

The ideas discussed in this article reflect the principles of the Positive Systems Approach, which emphasizes understanding children's behaviour within the broader context of their individual abilities, relationships, and environments. For readers interested in exploring these ideas further, my three books on the Positive Systems Approach, including The Parent's Companion, provide additional discussion and practical strategies for supporting children and families.

Want to dig deeper – References below:

1. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627

2. Fahmie, T. A., Iwata, B. A., & Jann, K. E. (2015). Comparison of edible and leisure reinforcers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(2), 331–343. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.200

3. Assessing parameters of reinforcement on efficiency of acquisition: A systematic review. (2023). Behavior Analysis in Practice. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-022-00715-7