The I-E-B-R Analysis Approach is incorporated following an expedient lie Timmy gives to his mother, Ann. Instead of immediately punishing for lying, she engages him in a dialogue to help them both understand why the lying occurred. In the process, Ann’s response to his behavior was significantly altered and Timmy was forced to slow down and look much more carefully at his behavior, which was a fast thinking attempt to make a problem go away.
I-E-B-R Analysis of Lying
Timmy bounded down the stairs, with hat, glove and bat in hand, eager to meet his friends at the park.
“Did you take out the trash, Tim,” called his mother.
“Yeah,” he yelled as he was going out the door.
Three hours later, Tim walked in the door, and almost tripped over Exhibit “A”, the bag of garbage his mother set out for him.
“I can’t believe you lied to me about taking out the trash. It is such a simple chore. You can do it in less than five minutes. Do it now. And no more park for you for the rest of the week,” she said and returned to her study.
Ouch! Where was the I-E-B-R in this vignette? Ann must have been having a bad day. She knows kids need time to play, but there are family responsibilities that need to be taken care of before anyone gets to play – at least in this house.
What if she and Timmy sat down and did the I-E-B-R Analysis together. Not for the garbage, but for the lying.
“Timmy, you lied about taking out the garbage. That’s not like you,” Ann began.
“I was in a hurry, Mom. My friends were waiting for me,” he explained.
“So you didn’t want to disappoint your friends?” she translated.
“Yeah. And I didn’t want them to ride off somewhere and I wouldn’t know where they went,” he added.
“So being on time for your friends is pretty important to you,” she asked.
“Yeah.”
“So why did you lie about the garbage?” Ann continued.
“Well, I didn’t mean to lie. It just came out because I was in a hurry,” Tim explained.
“So you just kind of said something so you wouldn’t have to stop what you were doing?” Ann said.
“I guess so, Mom. I didn’t stop to think about it. I didn’t plan to lie to you. It just came out,” he tried to explain.
“What would have happened if you had said, ‘No’, that you hadn’t taken out the trash,” she asked.
“I don’t know. You might have made me stop and do it and I would have been late to meet my friends,” he reasoned.
“Can you think of any other reasons?” she wondered.
“Well, I didn’t want you to get mad at me for not taking out the trash. I was going to do it when I got home. I didn’t forget. I just ran out of time to do it when I had to meet my friends,” Tim explained.
“But I was mad at you when I found out you had lied to me,” she added.
“Yeah. That didn’t work so well did it? I’m sorry, Mom. I won’t do it again,” Tim pleads.
“What is you plan for making that happen,” she asked.
“I’ll tell you the truth next time,” he responded.
“I thought you were worried I would be mad about the garbage and make you stop to do it. And you are right, I would have made you stop to do it,” she reminded him.
“Well. I’d rather have you mad at me for the garbage than for lying,” he reasoned.
“You got that right,” she said. “So how about the problem of disappointing your friends,” she added, complicating the equation for him.
“Yeah, that’s a hard one. I know what you want me to say. You want me to say, ‘if I take care of my responsibilities ahead of time, they won’t be a problem – like when I’m in a hurry,” he stated.
“Actually, that sounds like something your dad would say. Getting things done early is easier said than done, however,” she reminded him.
“Yeah. But having to talk to you about it is a lot harder than just doing it,” Tim observed.
“I’m glad you think so. I think.” Ann had to think about that for a second.
“So what kind of trouble am I in for lying to you,” Tim asked.
“Like you said. Having to talk to me is a consequence. And there is something more. Yes I was mad, but I was also disappointed. I thought I could trust you. It is important for us to be able to trust each other. I really want to be able to trust what you tell me,” she explained.
“I’m sorry, Mom. You can trust me. I’ll think first next time,” Tim promised.
“That works for me. Did you have fun with your friends?” she asked.
Let’s break this down into the I-E-B-R Analysis Ann just did with Tim.
Ann’s initial response took this form:
| Behavior: lied to his mother about the trash |
| Response: she got mad and grounded him from the park for a week |
What is the net result of Ann’s initial response, vis-à-vis the emotion and issue involved for Timmy? His issue of worrying about disappointing people just got worse. He will be a disappointment to his friends for the next week and he feels he has disappointed his mother. But he could also be mad at her for such a big punishment for such a little misdeed – not taking out the trash. Or, he could put two and two together and know that the week of grounding was for lying. But, still, it wasn’t like he meant to lie. He could very well take from this the need to not lie because it would get him into serious trouble with his mom. It’s not clear whether he would focus more on her anger and punishment or on her disappointment. If he thought about it, maybe he would. But as the week wears on, he might just start to resent the punishment.
| Issue: concern about disappointing friends |
| Emotion: anxiety about being late; felt rushed to get to the park |
| Behavior: lied to his mother about the trash |
| Response: the TALK. Ann had the long talk with Tim so they both would understand why things happened the way they did. |
So what do you think of the I-E-B-R Analysis that came of the talk? Ann got a clearer understanding about what led to the lying – as did Tim. One of the most important things revealed was the automatic, unthinking aspect of the lying. It was clearly a product of Fast thinking¹ rather than careful, Slow thinking. The debriefing was all about the Slow, analytical thinking that was absent at the scene of the crime. Do you think Ann and Tim ended their talk with a better understanding of the basis for the lying?
Did Tim get off too easy? He certainly didn’t suffer the punishment of the one-week grounding from the park. Nor did he suffer the consequence of his friends’ disappointment. Those consequences certainly would have gotten his attention. However, notice how Ann’s final reminder of how disappointed she was in the lying and how important it is to trust? She also contrasted that with a reminder of that is not the boy she knows or expects him to be. So, when it comes to responses or consequences that take the I and the E into consideration, her talk was pretty effective. His behavior was the result of Fast thinking and she forced him to do some good Slow thinking. They identified concern about disappointment as an important issue for Tim and she made sure that was employed in her response – in a healthy developmental sense. Lying to your mother is a disappointment and he should seek to avoid that. Healthy relationships depend on trust and he needed to be reminded of that. And … as you can see, a little guilt often works better than a paddle when it comes to developing internal discipline and self-regulation. Tim’s guilt about lying to his mother took center stage for him because it was not crowded out by anger, resentment, and questions of fairness. The goal of the I-E-B-R Analysis is to analyze before you act, both for parent and kid. Developmentally, it also supports the goal of helping the child become much more internally directed than externally responsive.
As for Timmy’s punishment and consequences? Do not underestimate the impact of the “talk”. Imbedded in the “we need to talk” is the message of his mother’s disappointment. That is a powerful consequence. It gives him a real reason to “care”. Caring is the cornerstone of moral integrity. Having to “think about his actions” and their consequences is a consequence of significance. Kids’ brains compartmentalize things. Therefore, Timmy can deal with the stress of being late and his mother’s question about the trash with an automatic “Yeah” that does not involve any thinking about the implications of his answer. Young compartmentalizing brains and Fast Thinking are a bad combination when it comes to “bad judgment”. Forcing him to ponder the questions she asked him made those linkages that were missing in the moment. Parents often need to serve as the child’s undeveloped cortex – holding the multiple “compartments” open simultaneously in one place so the child has to consider the big interconnected picture. All of this goes into the move from dependence on external structure to internal self-controls. Talks like these are the slow constructions of internal discipline and moral integrity.
Some folks would say this incident was trivial and Timmy just gave his mom a little “white lie” like any normal kid would do. On the other hand, Ann dealt with something simple and early rather than later after it had become a pattern or habit. Lying can be functional. For a kid, it makes a problem and the associated feelings go away immediately. But after talks like these, it will be more difficult for the lie to just make everything evaporate without a leaving a trace.
___________________________
¹ Throughout the website, you will notice the references to Fast and Slow thinking. Fast thinking is automatic, habitual, and often incorporates emotional responses. Slow thinking involves reasoning and analysis. Read about it for yourself in Daniel Kahneman’s book, Thinking Fast and Slow. Timmy’s quick lie was a great example of Fast thinking, whereas the long talk with his mother led him to do some Slow thinking.