Dear Economist
My young children, aged five and eight, are driving me insane. I try to discipline them, but they can be so wilful. At times I lose my temper and spank them. Is this wrong?
What else can I try?
ADVERTISEMENT
Yours,
Gill Harnsley, Chelsea
Dear Ms Harnsley,
Children are rational utility maximisers, but they have a high discount rate and therefore a short time horizon. Small immediate punishments and rewards are the most efficient way to give them the right incentives to behave.
Parents have trouble making credible promises of future punishments. Rational children know they can ignore threats of punishment if you have a record of bluster.
These two facts together argue for the time-honoured tradition of a chart with stars and black marks. The immediacy of the reward or punishment outweighs the fact that it is, after all, just a mark on a bit of paper. The chart can be reinforced by tying pocket money to the number of stars minus the number of black marks. This is an objective, transparent policy framework that will make it harder for you to renege on your threats: if the black marks are there on the chart, you can hardly cough up the allowance at the end of the week.
There is no need to spank your children unless you are poor. This is not to hold poor parents to different standards, simply to recognise that if a family is not rich enough to pay a generous allowance, then there is no financial threat available. The main alternative to withdrawing pocket money is spanking, which is free.
The economist Bruce Weinberg has found that very poor parents spank their children and withdraw allowances less frequently than other parents, even those of modest income. But if you can afford reasonable pocket money, then taking it away is all the punishment you need.
用“经济制裁”管束子女？
亲
爱的经济学家：
我有两个孩子，分别是5岁和8岁，他们快把我逼疯了。我试图约束他们，但他们太任性了。有时候，我会发脾气揍他们。这样做错了吗？
我还能做些什么？
吉尔?黑恩斯利(Gill Harnsley)，英国伦敦切尔西
亲爱的黑恩斯利女士：
孩子是“理性的效用最大化追求者”(rational utility maximisers)，但他们“贴现率”高，因此目光短浅。立即予以小小的奖惩，是给予他们适当动机，让他们做出得体举止的最高效率方式。
父母难以就未来的惩罚做出可信承诺。如果你有虚张声势的记录，理性的孩子就知道，他们可以忽略惩罚的威胁。
这两个事实合起来，支持了那个由来已久的传统――由星号和黑点组成的图表。尽管这归根结底只是纸片上的一个记号，但重要的是奖惩的直接性。将零用钱和星号与黑点数量相减的结果联系起来，可以加强图表的效果。这是一个客观、透明的政策框架，使你更难以对自己的威胁食言：如果黑点就在图表上，你就几乎不可能在周末时掏出零用钱。
没有必要揍孩子，除非你很穷。这不是对贫穷的父母奉行不同的标准，而只是承认，如果家庭不够富有，不能支付慷慨的零用钱，那就谈不上经济方面的威胁。取消零用钱的主要替代方法就是揍他一顿，这是不要钱的。
经济学家布鲁斯?温伯格(Bruce Weinberg)发现，与其他父母相比，甚至是与那些中等收入的父母相比，非常贫穷的父母揍孩子和取消零用钱的频率要低一些。但如果你能支付合理的零用钱，那么要做出惩罚，你只需取消零用钱就够了。
