The post you are reporting:
This is quite an old pyschological debate - that children can be "naughty" because
for some of them it is the only way they can gain attention they crave. They did quite a few studies on it, and discovered that naughty children gained disproportiontely more attention than those who were behaving well, but also that when naughty children did behave well, then the attention they were gaining was less. Therefore there was a positive inducement to behave "badly".
The answer, it is seen, is to reinforce good behaviour by rewarding it, and also to make sure that praise for something that is seen as good is achievable by every child (not every child will be top of the class in maths, for example, and for those that can't attain this kind of distinction, then if there is no other way of distinction, then one good way is rejecting such values, perhaps in a very noticeable way, oh, and tormenting those who do achieve it, such that even those who can begin to think it isn't desirable. In a way, it's a neat little defeat for what could be seen as an imposed meaningless adult goal.
On the other hand, reward and take notice of whatever it is that is good, and ignore what is bad, and, so the theory goes, you should get more good behaviour and less bad. It's sensible theory.
But, in practice, if we're talking in a school context for example, it isn't quite that easy, because the whole milieu has various achievements valued withn it (tests, sats, exams etc etc), becuase teachers do have limited time and resources, and also because such behaviour doesn't happen in isolation, but the child will take in values from other sources, such as the family, things seen in the media, etc. It's also a problem in that if a pupil does want to get on, and is being actively prevented by a naughty child, one has to and most certainly should think about that child's needs and wishes also.