ATTACK OTHER DOES NOT PAY

[drlynch]

Probably not surprising to anyone but good to document it. Of course we feel that "vindictiveness" is a form of "Attach Other", that is a "script" ultimately based on or motivated by a shame experience.

drlynch

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-03/uob-vdp032609.php
Vindictiveness doesn't pay (3/30/2009)
Tags:
revenge, emotions, decisions


Vindictiveness doesn't pay. This has been demonstrated by a current study at Bonn and Maastricht Universities. According to this study, a person inclined to deal with inequity on a tit-for-tat basis tends to experience more unemployment than other people. Vindictive people also have less friends and are less satisfied with their lives. The study appears in the current edition of the Economic Journal.

We tend to live by the motto "tit for tat". We repay an invitation to dinner with a counter-invitation; when a friend helps us to move house, we help to move his furniture a few months later. On the other hand, we repay meanness in the same coin. Scientists speak here of reciprocity. A person who repays friendly actions in a like manner is said to behave with positive reciprocity, and one who avenges unfairness acts with negative reciprocity.

Positive and negative reciprocity are interdependent traits: many people incline to positive reciprocity, others more to negative; others, again, incline to both. The researchers from Bonn and Maastricht wanted to discover what influence these traits of character have on parameters such as "success" or "satisfaction with life". For this, they resorted to data from the so-called "socio-economic panel". This contains information gathered by the Deutsche Institut fur Wirtschaftsforschung (German Institute for economic Research) in its annual surveys. These involve around 20,000 respondents from all over Germany and cover a diversity of topics.

The researchers in Bonn used this instrument to discover something about the attitudes to reciprocity of the participants in the study. They were to state, for example, to what extent they would repay a favour or, on the other hand, an insult on a tit-for-tat basis. "Both positive and negative reciprocity are widespread in Germany", declares Professor Dr. Armin Falk of Bonn University, summarising the results.

Positively reciprocal People perform more Overtime
The researchers then related these data to other results of the survey, whereby they stumbled upon a number of interesting correlations: "Thus, positively reciprocal people tend on average to perform more overtime, but only when they find the remuneration fair", declares Professor Dr. Thomas Dohmen of Maastricht University. "As they are very sensitive to incentives, they also tend to earn more money".

This is in stark contrast to vindictive people. With these people, the equation "more money = more work" does not always apply. Even pay cuts are not an effective means of bringing negatively reciprocal people back into line. Ultimately the danger arises that they will take revenge - for example, by refusing to work, or by sabotage. "On the basis of these theoretical considerations it would be natural to expect that negatively reciprocal people are more likely to lose their jobs", Falk explains: "A supposition which coincides with our results. Consequently, negatively reciprocal people experience a significantly higher rate of unemployment".

And in other respects, too, vindictiveness is not a maxim to be recommended. Anyone who prefers to act according to the Old Testament motto of "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" has on average less friends - and is clearly less than satisfied with his or her life.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by the University of Bonn

[drlynch]

I don't know if you have ever seen "Hell's Kitchen" or his other show but it took me a long time to watch him. He, Gordon Ramsey, somehow got me to "like" him a bit. But here, esp if you watch the video from this reporter you see how "shame" can be hidden with so much finesse and aplomb and then not be contained indefinitely. It explodes in a rant of obscenities and rage. The reporter calls him a "narcissist" and she is probably technically right in our "old" terminology.

I did not watch him at all for so long as it was pretty obvious that his "MO" was and is "humiliation". And I still have never watched "Hell's Kitchen".

see:http://www.slashfood.com/2009/06/08/gordon-ramsay-in-hot-water-after-sexist-rant/?icid=main|htmlws-main|dl3|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slashfood.com%2F2009%2F06%2F08%2Fgordon-ramsay-in-hot-water-after-sexist-rant%2F


I add this little piece to the following article about "attacking" not paying. Of course it has "paid" Gordon very very well in monetary terms and so it leaves the question why do we watch him and so many other humiliation based programs.

drlynch

[drlynch]

What we all knew anyway???
----------------------------------------------------------------------------


On Parenting: Spanking Causes More Harm as Children Get Older
By Nancy Shute
Sep 18

Spanking is a huge hot-button issue for parents. Many psychologists say that
spanking or any other physical discipline harms children and their relationship
with their parents. But quite a few parents disagree, and some experts do, too.
Lawrence Diller, a behavioral pediatrician in Walnut Creek, Calif., and author of
The Last Normal Child, even argues that more parents should consider spanking
to speed behavior improvements in young children.


I'm in the no-spanking camp myself, figuring I can't teach children that hitting is


bad if I'm doing it myself. But that doesn't mean I've never given a balky toddler


a swat on the fanny. Now that my daughter is in first grade, I wouldn't dream of


smacking her. My challenges come more in trying to figure out how to reward


appropriate behavior.




So I was fascinated by new research in the journal Child Development that


followed a total of about 750 children from ages 5 to 16 and looked at how


parents' choices of discipline in childhood were tied to teenage behavior.


Researchers found that the children whose parents put aside physical discipline


over the years demonstrated much less antisocial behavior than those whose


parents continued to use harsh or moderate physical discipline. The physically


disciplined children also had much poorer relationships with their parents. Of


course, there's no evidence that the lack of spanking caused the improved


behavior. It could be, for instance, that problem kids are more likely to be


spanked and also more likely to be problem teens. "More difficult children


elicit more punitive behavior in their parents," says Jennifer Lansford, who


led the study. Researchers tried to factor that out by adjusting the results


if children were considered badly behaved as 5-year-olds, as well as the


family's socioeconomic status. Inherited behavior traits could also be a


factor, says Lansford, a developmental psychologist and associate research


professor at Duke University's Center for Child and Family Policy.




What's new and intriguing in this work is that the researchers found that


most parents back off on physical discipline as children move into the


later elementary school grades. In other words, most parents pick up on


the fact that as their children become more sophisticated in their thinking


and behavior, their own approach to discipline has to grow up, too. For


whatever reason, the parents who can't or won't make that shift--and keep


hitting--are the ones who are more likely to have problem teenagers.




The good news: There are time-tested methods that work to discipline


children without smacking them. They've been tested on children of all


personality types and even work for children with serious behavior


problems. The big secrets? Praise works better than punishment in


teaching children proper behavior. But not just any praise. It needs to be:

--Superenthusiastic

--Specific to the desired behavior

--Reinforced with a smile or a touch

--Frequent

--And immediately following the desired behavior ("Wow, you did a great j

ob clearing the table!")




__._,_.___