Hi everyone, Kelly Mahler, occupational therapist, and I want to discuss a frequently asked question: What is the actual difference between a Compliance-based approach and an Interoception-based approach? I’m going to start by answering this with 8 differences that I see, and I’m curious to know what more you have to add.
Before I get to those 8 differences, I just want to acknowledge the fact that this conversation represents a big shift in our society and the systems that are in existence right now, like education, parenting, the workplace, etc. It is not easy. Compliance is everywhere. I’m just going to go ahead and say it. This makes me feel so vulnerable to say, but I use compliance. I use compliance with my own children. I use it as an occupational therapist with my clients. I am seeing compliance sneak into what I do on a daily basis. It’s ingrained in me because I have been raised in a society that has been very focused on compliance, and so I am working really hard to be reflective of my practice, of how I’m operating as a parent, as an occupational therapist, a human being. I am just trying every day to make baby steps towards more of an interoception approach that’s filled with inner curiosity and validation.
Okay, so let’s talk about the eight main differences between a compliance-based approach and an interoception based approach.
#1: Compliance-Based Approaches Focus on Controlling a Person’s Behavior While Interoception-Based Approaches Focus on Understanding it
Difference number one is that compliance-based approaches really focus on controlling another person’s behavior. That’s very different from an interoception-based approach where the focus is not on controlling the behavior, but rather on understanding the reason behind the behavior. If we can get to that deep “why,” if we can understand if there’s a lagging skill or if there’s internal discomfort, then that can drive our supports. We can intervene, we can help co-regulate, we can offer supports that acknowledge their inner world and support their ‘behavior’ in a more meaningful way.
#2: Compliance-Based Approaches Focus on Observable Behaviour While Interoception-Based Approaches Seek the “Why”
Difference number two is that compliance-based approaches are all about observable behavior, and they assume to understand why a person’s doing what they’re doing based on what is observed. There’s very little curiosity in that.
An interoception-based approach seeks to get to that deep “why.” It asks the person what’s going on. It uses respectful guessing based on an internal curiosity framework to consider what it is we see on the outside and how that reflects a person’s internal experience. Is that person in pain? Are they overwhelmed? Are they dysregulated?
#3: Blame/Responsibility is Placed Differently in a Compliance-Based Approach vs. an Interoception-Based Approach
Difference number three is that in a compliance-based approach, many times the blame is on the child. It suggests that the child is being purposefully defiant, oppositional, attention-seeking, avoidant, etc, etc. And so all of that blame really falls on the child. They’re putting all of that ownership on the child. The child is doing the behavior on purpose. The child needs to “fix” their own behavior in a compliance-based approach.
In an interoception-based approach, that ownership is on us as the adult. For example, we can ask ourselves: how can we change our behavior to be a better support? How can we understand the child’s body and inner experience a little bit better? What does the child’s body need from us in this moment for success and thriving? What can we do to help the child?
#4: Compliance-Based Approaches Force a Learner to Mask, While Interoception-Based Approaches Encourage the Opposite
Difference number four is that a compliance-based approach really encourages and forces many children to hide, mask, suppress, dissociate from their internal experience. For example, compliance teaches them to hide or mask their internal experience in order to please other people and get the reinforcer or to avoid the punishment. They are suppressing their internal needs many times in order to survive the world, whereas an interoception-based approach is completely the opposite. It encourages each person to explore their inner needs, to understand them so that they can meet their body’s needs more successfully. Interoception empowers a person to know what they need for comfort and to go after that comfort in respectful ways. This body knowledge in turn improves so-called “behavior.” An interoception-based approach is really about empowering each person to understand their body so that they can be more regulated and present for participating.
#5: Compliance-Based Approaches and Interoception-Based Approaches Use Different Forms of Motivation
The next difference is really all about motivation, and compliance-based approaches are rooted in external forms of motivation. Those external reinforcers, whether it’s stickers, token charts, or clip up-clip down charts, there’s lots of forms of external motivation. Compliance-based approaches many times assume that a child is not doing something because they lack the motivation to do it. So, they come in with all of these external forms of motivation, like these token boards and sticker boards, to try to convince that child to behave. It fails to really capture, again, that inner experience of the child.
Why are is that child not being successful?
And that’s where an interoception-based approach comes in. It’s really about helping a child to understand themselves, to understand their body’s needs, so they can tap into their internal motivation and do well when they can. With interoception work, children explore and understand themselves. They understand what their body uniquely needs to be able to do well when they can.
#6: Compliance-Based Approaches Promote Conditional Self-Worth While Interoception-Based Approaches Foster Unconditional Self-Worth
The next difference is really all about our self-worth. Those compliance-based approaches really condition a person to develop conditional self-worth, where their self-identity becomes “good behavior = a good child.” There is so much focus on “What is good behavior?” in a compliance-based approach. And if you can meet those standards, that list of qualities of ‘good behavior’ then your identity may become rooted in being a good person. What if you are unable to meet that list of standards or qualities? What is the impact? I can tell you from 22 years of experience supporting dysregulated, misunderstood clients….their identity becomes rooted in “I’m a bad person”. All because compliance formed this narrative.
So, shifting to an interoception-based approach can create unconditional self-worth, of knowing your worth is valid, your inner experience is worthy of attention. Regardless of if you’re having a good day or a bad day, you are always worthy of that attention and support.
#7: Compliance-Based Approaches Are Rooted in a Power Hierarchy While Interoception-Based Approaches Are Rooted in Safe Relationships
Difference number seven is that compliance-based approaches are rooted in a power hierarchy where one person is clearly in charge and the other person must submit to the demands. It is essentially an adult sending a message of “If you please me, you can get the reward.” “If you please me, you will be safe.”
An interception-based approach is different in that it is really rooted in safe relationships where it’s a mutual pairing or partnership, and that child does well because they feel safe with us.
So, if we talk about the compliance version, that child is pretty much doing well because they’re scared to not do well. Conversely, in an interoception-informed approach where we’re working on inner feels and helping someone to feel interoceptively safe with us, that child does well because they feel safe and they are learning how to give their body what it needs to do well.
#8: Compliance-Based Approaches Focus on Quick Results While Interoception-Based Approaches Nurture Long Term Results
The eighth difference between compliance-based and interoception-based approaches is that in compliance, it is often a quick result. Many times, you might see a behavior change, but it’s at the expense of long-term issues. The trauma from compliance is being noted in literature and published research. The damages of compliance on the interoceptive sense is being expressed by countless people with lived experience. There are long-term consequences of compliance-based approaches.
If we shift to an interoception-based approach, we do get results, but oftentimes they’re slower because a person is learning, or really re-learning, about their body and learning to honor what their body needs. And that can take time, especially if they have been exposed to compliance for many, many years of their life. They have to override all that conditioning where they were being taught to ignore their body, and they need time to get back in their body, to return to and understand what their body needs.
Hopefully this is a helpful discussion in understanding the differences between compliance and interoception approaches. And I hope that you’ll join me in taking small little baby steps. I know this is a big systems change. Will you join me in taking small baby steps towards a better world and a more interoception-focused place?
Until next time.