There's a very good movement to shift calling kids "attention-seeking" as a derogatory label, to "connection-seeking" which more accurately describes how we're all wired to crave social approval. Attention for kids is not just nice; it's crucial. They can literally die without it. So kids seeking attention are adapting to harsh reality and following biological imperatives that are life-saving. Connection is, of course, a more healthy and deep result if it's on offer. So often, for kids, it is not.
I love how you broke this down. I tend to bristle at interpretations of human behaviour that lean into just different forms of conditioning, as I do think that may be a little too simplistic (and maybe that's the fault of the hearers). So many kids with autism have been deeply, deeply harmed by attempts to "condition" them into normalcy. I know that's not what you're talking about, but it comes up in my head. And at the same time, the little dopamine hits I get when I get likes for my work here are not nothing. Of course I want attention, AND connection, and money, and all the things. You're right, even the most charitable acts are usually self-serving at some level, and we all kinda know it.
Anyway, it's an essay worth reading and I think it's also always good to check our egos and occasionally wonder why we do the things we do...really.
So thanks, and God bless where you are. I can't imagine.
That’s such a beautifully thoughtful take. Thank you. I completely agree that “connection-seeking” is a far better term than “attention-seeking.” The more I study counselling psychology, the more I see how vital that connection is, especially for kids. You’re right, it’s literally life giving.
I also appreciate what you said about conditioning. You’ve nailed the nuance. I wasn’t trying to suggest humans are just lab rats reacting to stimuli, but rather that our need for connection is reinforced over time. The science simply gives language to something our hearts have always known.
And I share your view on autistic kids. Conditioning without empathy can do immense harm. It’s not behaviour we should be trying to normalise, but humanity we should be trying to nurture.
Thank you for taking the time to write such a considered response. You’ve added real depth to the conversation and reminded me that even through a screen, connection is still possible.
There's a very good movement to shift calling kids "attention-seeking" as a derogatory label, to "connection-seeking" which more accurately describes how we're all wired to crave social approval. Attention for kids is not just nice; it's crucial. They can literally die without it. So kids seeking attention are adapting to harsh reality and following biological imperatives that are life-saving. Connection is, of course, a more healthy and deep result if it's on offer. So often, for kids, it is not.
I love how you broke this down. I tend to bristle at interpretations of human behaviour that lean into just different forms of conditioning, as I do think that may be a little too simplistic (and maybe that's the fault of the hearers). So many kids with autism have been deeply, deeply harmed by attempts to "condition" them into normalcy. I know that's not what you're talking about, but it comes up in my head. And at the same time, the little dopamine hits I get when I get likes for my work here are not nothing. Of course I want attention, AND connection, and money, and all the things. You're right, even the most charitable acts are usually self-serving at some level, and we all kinda know it.
Anyway, it's an essay worth reading and I think it's also always good to check our egos and occasionally wonder why we do the things we do...really.
So thanks, and God bless where you are. I can't imagine.
That’s such a beautifully thoughtful take. Thank you. I completely agree that “connection-seeking” is a far better term than “attention-seeking.” The more I study counselling psychology, the more I see how vital that connection is, especially for kids. You’re right, it’s literally life giving.
I also appreciate what you said about conditioning. You’ve nailed the nuance. I wasn’t trying to suggest humans are just lab rats reacting to stimuli, but rather that our need for connection is reinforced over time. The science simply gives language to something our hearts have always known.
And I share your view on autistic kids. Conditioning without empathy can do immense harm. It’s not behaviour we should be trying to normalise, but humanity we should be trying to nurture.
Thank you for taking the time to write such a considered response. You’ve added real depth to the conversation and reminded me that even through a screen, connection is still possible.