When discussing strategies for managing challenging behaviors in young children with early childhood teams, a recurring question arises: “How do we respond and give attention to a child exhibiting challenging behaviors?”. This often boils down to the debate between strategies like planned ignoring, which some experts advocate, and the approach of connecting with the child, which is increasingly being emphasized.
This dichotomy prompts the crucial question: Which approach is truly effective and beneficial for young learners?
A recent discussion about the merits of ignoring versus connecting led me to revisit the concept of planned ignoring. Planned ignoring is presented as a technique to reduce unwanted behaviors by deliberately not paying attention to them.
The rationale behind planned ignoring often includes these points:
- Ignoring the behavior prevents accidental reinforcement of negative actions.
- The child is seeking attention, and giving in reinforces this “attention-seeking behavior.”
- Ignoring is the best approach to avoid fulfilling the child’s desire for attention when they misbehave.
Conversely, other experts champion a contrasting philosophy centered around the “four S’s”:
- Safety: Ensuring children feel protected, nurtured, and loved, creating a secure environment.
- Seen: Validating children’s feelings, engaging in responsive interactions, and allowing them space to process intense emotions.
- Soothed: Meeting children’s needs and utilizing co-regulation with caregivers to help them return to a balanced emotional state.
- Secure: Fostering secure attachments, enabling children to internalize well-being through reliable relationships, promoting overall thriving.
This brings us back to the central question: Which perspective should guide our interactions with young children?
In my Pre-K Teach & Play podcast episode, “The Plan Was To Ignore, So Why Are We Learning To Connect?“, I delve into my reflections and concerns regarding ignoring (in its broadest sense) as a strategy in early childhood education.
Key Concerns About Ignoring Children’s Behaviors
My primary concerns about utilizing ignoring strategies revolve around several critical points:
-
Ignoring Behavior Can Mean Ignoring Needs: While the intention might be to ignore the behavior, the reality is that we risk overlooking the child’s underlying needs and their attempts to communicate those needs through their actions. Children, especially young ones, may not have the verbal skills to express complex emotions or unmet needs effectively. Challenging behaviors often serve as a signal that something is amiss in their world.
-
Ignoring Undermines Brain Architecture and Attachment: Our role as educators and caregivers extends to being “brain architects”. This means actively fostering secure attachments and connections with children. Ignoring a child’s bids for attention or communication directly contradicts this fundamental role. Secure attachments are built through consistent responsiveness and attuned interactions, not through withdrawal and ignoring.
-
Planned Ignoring as a Form of Punishment: A significant concern is that planned ignoring, by its very definition, operates as a form of punishment. Even if described as “mild punishment” by some, any strategy that withholds connection and responsiveness as a consequence for behavior can be detrimental to a child’s development and sense of security.
This last point is particularly troubling. Regardless of research backing, employing punishment, even mild forms, raises ethical questions in early childhood education. My understanding of human development, personal growth, and systems change strongly suggests that individuals flourish when their strengths are nurtured and their positive emotional attractor is engaged. Growth and learning are optimized within the framework of secure attachments with trusted caregivers.
Therefore, it becomes problematic when early childhood teams adopt strategies, often under external direction, that inherently involve punishment. Furthermore, relying solely on an “evidence-base” to justify a strategy warrants closer examination.
Examining the Evidence Base for Planned Ignoring: Three Key Concerns
My reservations about the evidence supporting planned ignoring stem from three main areas: clarity, fidelity, and attention to potential harm.
1. Lack of Clarity Regarding Target Populations:
The research literature on planned ignoring often lacks consistent clarity regarding its intended recipients. While some proponents suggest its broad applicability across ages, others caution against using it with non-verbal children, those with motor skill limitations, or those with executive functioning challenges. Crucially, I found a lack of specific considerations for young children whose brains are still rapidly developing, children who have experienced trauma, and neurodiverse children. These vulnerable populations necessitate careful, nuanced approaches, especially as behavioral strategies developed for older children in K-12 settings are increasingly introduced into early childhood contexts.
2. Lack of Fidelity in Implementation:
Many “evidence-based” strategies, including planned ignoring, hinge on faithful implementation to achieve the reported positive outcomes. This means replicating the specific steps and conditions under which the strategy was researched and deemed effective. However, even a cursory review of planned ignoring research reveals considerable variability in its practical application. The definition of “planned ignoring” itself differs, ranging from looking away to completely leaving the room. Furthermore, inconsistencies exist in which behaviors are deemed appropriate for ignoring. Often, it’s recommended only for “attention-seeking misbehavior,” excluding behaviors like noncompliance, aggression, or safety concerns. This lack of standardized guidelines raises concerns about the feasibility of consistent and effective implementation by educators and parents in real-world settings. How can practitioners consistently achieve positive results when the very definition and application of the strategy are so variable and ill-defined?
3. Lack of Attention to Potential Negative Impacts:
From my perspective, there is insufficient emphasis on the conditions under which planned ignoring proves ineffective or raises ethical intelligence concerns. I worry about the limited discussion surrounding the potential harm of ignoring, especially given the frequent warnings in the literature that “the behavior is likely to worsen before it improves,” and in some instances, “the child may become aggressive.” Educational strategies, particularly those involving young children, should not come with such significant warning labels. Furthermore, the existing research on planned ignoring largely overlooks the potential impact on the developing brain and the risks to forming insecure attachments. This absence of consideration is deeply concerning when we think about children’s fundamental need for secure attachments and responsive communication to have their needs met. How can children develop self-regulation through co-regulation if their attempts to communicate are consistently ignored by trusted caregivers?
The Core Message: Connection Over Ignoring
Based on my exploration, evidence from neuroscience, interpersonal neurobiology, and the science of early childhood development offers compelling counter-evidence to the use of ignoring, whether planned or otherwise, as a primary strategy for addressing challenging behaviors in young children.
Learn More in the Podcast
To delve deeper into this discussion, listen to my podcast episode here.
In this episode, you will discover:
- Five significant problems associated with ignoring (broadly defined).
- Three effective alternative strategies to employ instead of ignoring.
- Three key takeaways to reshape your approach to challenging behaviors.
- Links to numerous practical resources and solutions (available in the show notes).
Note: The “four S’s” framework is inspired by the groundbreaking work of @drdansiegel and @tinapaynebryson. Explore their insightful book, “The Power of Showing Up: How Parental Presence Shapes Who Our Kids Become and How Their Brains Get Wired“.
