Do nonphysical punishments reduce antisocial behavior more than spanking? a comparison using the strongest previous causal evidence against spanking (original) (raw)
Related papers
Moderate spanking: Model or deterrent of children's aggression in the family?
Journal of Family Violence, 1986
Previous research has rarely distinguished among the effects of minimal, moderate, and severe physical punishment on children's antisocial aggression. Using a nationally representative sample, this study compared the effects of different frequencies of physical punishment on children's reported physical aggression against other family members. In addition, the interaction of parental reasoning with physical punishment was examined. All analyses were repeated for preschoolers, preadolescents, and adolescents. The results generally indicated a linear positive association between physical punishment and child aggression. For preadolescent and adolescent aggression toward the parent, however, this association depended upon parental use of reasoning, such that spanking had a minimal effect on aggression for frequent reasoners. The combination of infrequent reasoning and frequent spanking was associated with dramatically increased aggression. The conclusion emphasizes additional unresolved issues about the effects of spanking, particularly the ambiguous direction of causal influence between parent and child.
Criminology, 2000
Several studies with older children have reported a positive relationship between parental use of corporal punishment and child conduct problems. This has lead some social scientists to conclude that physical discipline fosters antisocial behavior. In an attempt to avoid the methodological dificulties that have plagued past research on this issue, the present study used a proportional measure of corporal punishment, controlled for earlier behavior problems and other dimensions of parenting, and tested for interaction and curvilinear effects. The analyses were performed using a sample of Iowa families that displayed moderate use of corporal punishment and a Taiwanese sample that demonstrated more frequent and severe use of physical discipline, especially by fathers. For both samples, level of parental warmthkontrol (i.e., support, monitoring, and inductive reasoning) was the strongest predictor of adolescent conduct problems. There was little evidence of a relationship between corporal punishment and conduct problems f o r 47 48 SIMONS ET AL.
American Psychologist, 2019
Gershoff et al. (2018) recently summarized the scientific evidence against disciplinary spanking, using epidemiological and psychological criteria for causal validity. Unfortunately, the evidence they cited would make most actions to correct serious problems appear to be harmful, whether implemented by parents (e.g., timeout) or professionals. The reason is that the type of evidence that Gershoff et al. consider adequate is insufficient for establishing a causal connection between any disciplinary response to persistent defiance and problem behaviors in children, whether that response is spanking or an effective alternative to spanking. Before opposing a widespread practice such as spanking, researchers need to document stronger causal evidence against it and identify an alternative demonstrated to be more effective.
Physical punishment and child outcomes: a narrative review of prospective studies
The Lancet, 2021
Physical punishment is increasingly viewed as a form of violence that harms children. This narrative review summarises the findings of 69 prospective longitudinal studies to inform practitioners and policy makers about physical punishment's outcomes. Our review identified seven key themes. First, physical punishment consistently predicts increases in child behaviour problems over time. Second, physical punishment is not associated with positive outcomes over time. Third, physical punishment increases the risk of involvement with child protective services. Fourth, the only evidence of children eliciting physical punishment is for externalising behaviour. Fifth, physical punishment predicts worsening behaviour over time in quasi-experimental studies. Sixth, associations between physical punishment and detrimental child outcomes are robust across child and parent characteristics. Finally, there is some evidence of a dose-response relationship.
Parental Corporal Punishment Predicts Behavior Problems in Early Childhood
Journal of Family Psychology, 2007
examined the impact of corporal punishment (CP) on children's behavior problems. Longitudinal analyses were specified that controlled for covarying contextual and parenting variables and that partialed child effects. The results indicate that parental CP uniquely contributes to negative behavioral adjustment in children at both 36 months and at 1st grade, with the effects at the earlier age more pronounced in children with difficult temperaments. Parents and mental health professionals who work to modify children's negative behavior should be aware of the unique impact that CP likely plays in triggering and maintaining children's behavior problems. Broad-based family policies that reduce the use of this parenting behavior would potentially increase children's mental health and decrease the incidence of children's behavior problems.
The Predictors of Parental Use of Corporal Punishment
Family Relations, 2007
Corporal punishment has been the focus of considerable study over the past decade. Some recent research suggesting that the use of corporal punishment may have significant long-term negative effects on children has prompted increasing exploration and interest in the issue. We used tobit regression analysis and data from the 2000 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to examine both the prevalence and the chronicity of spanking in a nationally representative sample of parents. Mother's characteristics (e.g., age, education) and neighborhood context did not show a relationship with parental use of corporal punishment. Among parents who used corporal punishment, being Protestant had a relatively large relationship with its use. Although children's externalizing behaviors had some association with parent's propensity to spank, findings suggest that use of corporal punishment may be better understood as part of a constellation of behaviors relating to a parenting style. Further, findings indicate that it is easier to predict the incidence of corporal punishment than to predict its frequency of use.
Session at the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, 2019
This outline provides pincite references for research supporting appropriate disciplinary spanking, in contrast to the predominantly correlational evidence used to oppose all spanking by the APA and AAP. Two major publications in the past year showed that (1) the correlational evidence against customary spanking becomes trivial after adjusting for pre-existing child differences. Moreover, that trivial evidence can be either harmful or beneficial on average, depending upon the statistical method used to adjust for pre-existing differences. (2) The second recent publication shows that the evidence against customary spanking is identical to the apparent effects of most corrective actions when analyzed in the same way (e.g., longitudinal analyses controlling statistically for initial differences in the outcome). This is true whether the corrective actions are by parents (e.g., other disciplinary responses) or professionals (treatments for depression in women). The outline summarizes other meta-analyses ignored in scientific summaries used to oppose all spanking and evidence that back-up spanking and phased-out spanking result in better outcomes compared to never-spanked children.
Protection against antisocial behavior in children exposed to physically abusive discipline
Journal of Adolescent Health, 2005
The study investigated protective factors (school commitment/importance, parent/peer disapproval of antisocial behavior, positive future orientation, and religion) hypothesized to lower risk for antisocial behavior among adolescents who, as children, had been physically abused. Protective factors also were investigated for comparison, nonabused children, and for children at risk on abuse and other factors: low socioeconomic status and early antisocial behavior. Methods: Analyses used a two-step hierarchical regression approach. In step 1, age, gender, and early antisocial behavior were entered as controls. In step 2, each protective factor was entered separately as a predictor. A final regression model in each case examined the additive (combined) effect of all protective factors on a given outcome. Tests of predictor-by-group interactions were used to examine group differences. Results: Among abused and nonabused children, having a strong commitment to school, having parents and peers who disapprove of antisocial behavior, and being involved in a religious community lowered rates of lifetime violence, delinquency, and status offenses. Having a positive future orientation appeared less powerful as a protective influence. Exposure to an increasing number of protective factors was for each outcome associated with a diminution in risk for antisocial behavior. Conclusions: Protective factors represent targets for preventive intervention that are viable for children as they enter adolescence. The fact that protective factors were predictive of lower antisocial behavior in both the abuse and comparison groups suggests that protective effects are more universal than they are unique to a given group of children.
1986
This study investigates why some parents deviate from American norms on childrearing and decide to use no form of physical punishment. Based on the percentage of American parents who use physical punishment, the views of popular childrearing manuals, relevant laws and court cases it is concluded that the use of physical punishment of children in American society is a context where the use of physical force is legitimate. To locate non-spanking parents, questionnaires were distributed to parents of all first, second and third graders in a eastern seacoast town of approximately 27,000 people. Of those who returned the questionnaires, 87% reported using physical punishment. Among those who spank, 60% said they used it for rule violation and found it to be effective in childrearing. Forty percent reported that they used it when the parents themselves were tired, frustrated or out of control. These parents said nothing about the behavior of their children as being related to the use of p...
A brief intervention affects parents’ attitudes toward using less physical punishment
Child Abuse & Neglect, 2013
Consecutive English and Spanish speaking caregivers of 6-24 month old children were randomly assigned to either a control or intervention group. Parents in the intervention group were instructed to view at least 4 options to discipline a child in an interactive multimedia program. The control group participants received routine primary care with their resident physician. After the clinic visit, all parents were invited to participate in a research study; the participation rate was 98% (258/263). The key measure was the Attitudes Toward Spanking (ATS) scale. The ATS is correlated with parents' actual use of physical punishment. Parents with higher scores are more likely to use physical punishment to discipline their children. Parents in the intervention group had an ATS score that was significantly lower than the ATS score of parents in the control group (median = 24.0, vs. median = 30; p = 0.043). Parents in the control group were 2 times more likely to report that they would spank a child who was misbehaving compared with parents in the intervention group (16.9% vs. 7.0%, p = 0.015). In the short-term, a brief intervention, integrated into the primary care visit, can affect parents' attitudes toward using less physical punishment. It may be feasible to teach parents to not use physical punishment using a population-based approach. The findings have implications for how to improve primary care services and the prevention of violence.