Study: Spanking increases childhood defiance and mental health issues

[Stone the Crow]

Still waiting. Your excuses aren't going to work. I say again: Either prove it or shut the fuck up.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do I get the feeling that most of the people stating they got spanked and it was wrong in reality had some other much deeper behavioral problems than the spanking.

My spidey senses keep tingling.

Eh, it's the same reason people lie about having access to a study through the university they don't attend.

Lying on the Internet is easy, especially if you're trying to make an absolutely asinine point that you can't back up any other way.

[Espe]

Lying on the Internet is easy, especially if you're trying to make an absolutely asinine point that you can't back up any other way.

Hey I'm not making any bold claims here, I'm just saying I feel bad for the kids who have to deal with the weakness and dysfunction of parents who probably shouldn't have ever been parents in the first place.

It's sad.

[TITAN308]

Hey I'm not making any bold claims here, I'm just saying I feel bad for the kids who have to deal with the weakness and dysfunction of parents who probably shouldn't have ever been parents in the first place.

It's sad.

It does make you wonder what kind of problems a kid had with their parents as a child when they grow up and begin trolling the internet and getting banned countless times. Some deep rooted anti-social tendencies is my bet. Little secret love of punishment perhaps.

Sounds kinky.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Still waiting. Your excuses aren't going to work. I say again: Either prove it or shut the fuck up.

I ask you once again, when I prove it, what are you going to do?

Are you going to go back and "prove" (fucking LOL) the numerous claims you made before I ever stated I had school VPN?

Are you going to admit you were wrong the whole time?

Are you going to do what we all know you're going to do and just continue to demand I prove more and more and more and more and more so you don't have to admit you were wrong, and continue in true fashion as a bullshit artist?

Answer that question, and I will post a summary of a couple of sections of the paper.

Not answering that question, and just continue crying like you have been, means you admit you were wrong.

[Espe]

It does make you wonder what kind of problems a kid had with their parents as a child when they grow up and begin trolling the internet and getting banned countless times.

There you go projecting again.

I'm not even talking about you, I mean I don't know for sure but I would hope you're not gleefully abusing your own children. It's hard to tell from your posts here but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Like I said, it's just sad when parents take out their weakness and dysfunction on their children. I'm genuinely sorry if that triggered you, champ, I know what a delicate flower you are.

[Stone the Crow]

"Blah blah blah! Look at me still trying to obfuscate everything while I pray and pray and PRAY that the study hits Google so I can prove that I'm really not completely and totally full of shit! Even though I've already proven that I am a few dozen times already! Blah blah blah!"

Any time now would be nice.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Any time now would be nice.

I provide proof, you choose and answer:

A) Somehow by some weird twist of reality prove all the claims you made BEFORE I ever said that I had a VPN.

B) Admit you don't know what you're talking about, and that you were wrong this whole time.

C) Continue to deflect and demand I provide more proof for random things, because you know you're wrong, but don't want to admit it.

Answer A, B, or C and I'll post the summary you seem to want so badly.

Answer with anything else and we'll know you're a bullshitter.

[Stone the Crow]

I provide proof

The fuck you have.

"Blah blah blah. Lookie lookie, I'm still trying to bullshit my way out of this! I can't just come out and admit that I'm a shitty, pathetic liar! Whatever will people think of me (even though they already do thanks to this thread alone)! Instead, I will continue my campaign of basically saying 'lol u r dum u proof itz!" and it'll totally work in my equally sad, pathetic mind! Blah blah blah!"

<checks his watch> <taps his foot> Yep, definitely still waiting, and still not taking any of your bullshit.

[May90]

The fuck you have.

<checks his watch> <taps his foot> Yep, definitely still waiting, and still not taking any of your bullshit.

Lol, dude, are you purposefully ignoring The Batman's point? Why?

[Stone the Crow]

Lol, dude, are you purposefully ignoring The Batman's point? Why?

Because 1.) he has no point, and 2.) he's trying everything he can to come up with a reason not to prove his original point. I'm not going to let that happen. I'm not falling for the bullshit, no matter how much he tries diverting the conversation.

[May90]

Because 1.) he has no point, and 2.) he's trying everything he can to come up with a reason not to prove his original point. I'm not going to let that happen. I'm not falling for the bullshit, no matter how much he tries diverting the conversation.

He does have a very strong point. By your behavior here, you've made it clear that you aren't interested in an actual discussion, so even if The Batman links the study and it proves his point, you still will find a reason to dismiss it. Hence, he wants you to state right away what you are going to do in this case, so you can't just get out of this with some lousy excuse later.

The fact that you didn't even understand his point, and didn't even realize he had one, though, pretty much proves once more that discussion is not what you are after.

[Stone the Crow]

He does have a very strong point.

No he doesn't.

By your behavior here, you've made it clear that you aren't interested in an actual discussion, so even if The Batman links the study and it proves his point, you still will find a reason to dismiss it.

Wrong.

Well, partially right. The right part is that I probably will dismiss it because it's almost assuredly every bit as flawed and ridiculous as it's been suggested to be since the very dawn of this thread. You know, back when people were actually discussing the study. If the opposite is true and it's completely on the up-and-up, I will have no problem admitting that. But there's no way of knowing with no access to it, despite the Batman having REPEATEDLY stated that it TOTALLY is through his non-existent university VPN.

The wrong part is everything else. I have been more than willing to discuss it, and actually have. I've even repeatedly brought up a number of actual, relevant points, but all the Batman has done is gone "lol u r sew dum!!!!!" and then ignored everything.

So you'll have to forgive me for following his lead for the last however many posts. I'm done taking his bullshit. And yes, I am being particularly aggressive in doing so, as I am towards all the ridiculous nobodies who come in to try to defend him. Even though even they -- and you -- full well that he is nothing but the lying sack of shit he is.

And also: Still waiting.

[May90]

No he doesn't.


Wrong.

Well, partially right. The right part is that I probably will dismiss it because it's almost assuredly every bit as flawed and ridiculous as it's been suggested to be since the very dawn of this thread. You know, back when people were actually discussing the study. If the opposite is true and it's completely on the up-and-up, I will have no problem admitting that. But there's no way of knowing with no access to it, despite the Batman having REPEATEDLY stated that it TOTALLY is through his non-existent university VPN.

The wrong part is everything else. I have been more than willing to discuss it, and actually have. I've even repeatedly brought up a number of actual, relevant points, but all the Batman has done is gone "lol u r sew dum!!!!!" and then ignored everything.

So you'll have to forgive me for following his lead for the last however many posts. I'm done taking his bullshit. And yes, I am being particularly aggressive in doing so, as I am towards all the ridiculous nobodies who come in to try to defend him. Even though even they -- and you -- full well that he is nothing but the lying sack of shit he is.

And also: Still waiting.

It is funny how you don't see the irony of this all.

[Stone the Crow]

It is funny how you don't see the irony of this all.

Because there isn't.

I'm not full of shit. I'm not the one making anything up (despite Mr. I'm Going to Try to Obfuscate All This!!! trying to claim otherwise). I'm not the one lying that I've read -- sorry, "skimmed" -- the study. I'm not the one pretending I'm attending university and have access to the study through my school's network, whereas in reality I'm much more likely some 45-year-old neckbeard living in mom's spare bedroom.

I am, however, the one not taking any of his bullshit.

Prove it or shut the fuck up.

[Espe]

I'm not full of shit. I'm not the one making anything up

Alright, alright, calm down, everything is going to be fine.

Being abused as a child clearly had no negative impact on you whatsoever and now we can all just ignore these studies that prove otherwise.

[Stone the Crow]

Alright, alright, calm down, everything is going to be fine.

Being abused as a child clearly had no negative impact on you whatsoever and now we can all just ignore these studies that prove otherwise.

What study? By all means, link to it.

Oh wait... right......

[Cthulhu 2020]

The fuck you have.


<checks his watch> <taps his foot> Yep, definitely still waiting, and still not taking any of your bullshit.

So you could have just simply told me that if I provided proof, you would too. You know, I show my hand FIRST, then you. I offered to show it first, if only you said you would too. I provided you with every opportunity to take advantage of that. So we'll just go with what your answer really means:

Answer with anything else and we'll know you're a bullshitter.

But here we go, I'll humor you, even though we know option C is what would have happened. You know, the one where I provide the summary of a small portion of the article and then you start demanding I provide proof of even more things, without going back and proving every single claim you made.


This being a long term study occurring over 50 years, there were actually several mini releases of initial findings and smaller portions of this study released as their own independent studies which were later used as primary references. See:

Changes in parents’ spanking and reading as mechanisms for Head Start impacts on children. 2015 Gershoff, et al.
Wait until your father gets home? Fathers' and mothers' spanking and development of child aggression. 2015 Lee, et al.
Parent-adolescent conflict as sequences of reciprocal negative emotion: Links with conflict resolution and adolescents’ behavior problems. 2015 Moed et al.
(scrolls a bit)
More harm than good: A summary of scientific research on the intended and unintended effects of corporal punishment on children. 2010 Gershoff et al.
Understanding mother-adolescent conflict discussions: Concurrent and across-time prediction from youths’ dispositions and parenting. 2008 Eisenberg et al.

Just to name a few of the hundreds of sources.

Some of the top researchers who worked on this project have CV's longer than most master thesis projects. One researcher has a 17 page CV... that only includes their work since '08. One of the researchers who worked on this paper has done more since '08 than you've done your entire life. Let that sink in.


Distinguishing Corporal Punishment from Physical Abuse:

They use mostly legal definitions as per utilized by several US states, citing it as "reasonable" force on the rear or extremities, that it must be "appropriate", "moderate" or "necessary" (all state definitions) and use many legal cases brought against parents as quantifiers. No lasting physical harm must be caused, and that seems to be the most important note about it. “Corporal punishment is the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain but not injury for the purposes of correction or control of the child’s behavior”

It goes on to talk about how much of the problem with research on corporal punishment in the past is that both abuse (corporal punishment that leaves lasting harm) and lesser corporal punishment were part of the study, and for several pages talks about the concerns and controls used to ensure that they studied only the effects of spanking and not what is considered abuse.


Some of the lasting problems talked about are Immediate Compliance, Moral Itnernalization, Aggression, "Delinquent, Criminal and Antisocial behaviors", Quality of parent-child relationships, mental health, adult abuse of own children or spouse, and being the victim of abuse by spouse - in which they talk about how victims of abuse were FAR more likely to defend and even justify their own abuse later in life if their parents had spanked them.

The study itself not only took on its own set of parameters and patients, but also analyzed what seems like thousands of others, incorporating them into its own research.

There are tables of hundreds of patients, studies, groups, etc.

The controls are, as expected, numerous. And far more complex than your psych 101 controls that you insist they did not consider. Such controls include other forms of parental discipline, parental care for child, attention child is given, time that parent is around child each day, places where behavior and punishment happens, just to name a few.

The paper acknowledges that there could be tertiary effects not yet considered. Every single paper published says as such. The exhaustive list of controls, scenarios, studies used and referenced, leaves infinitesimally small doubt that at this point there could have been factors not accounted for.


So, Mr Bullshitter, going to prove to me that they didn't control for people not answering the questionnaires fully honestly?

Lol.

[Stone the Crow]

<reads over what you just vomited up>

Yeah, still not seeing a quote. Just you typing up a bunch of bullshit you just spent the last hour or so typing up. (Complete with references to the blurbs already on Google. Shocking!)

Still waiting!

[Cthulhu 2020]

<reads over what you just vomited up>

Yeah, still not seeing a quote. Just you typing up a bunch of bullshit you just spent the last hour or so typing up.

Still waiting!

As pointed out by someone before, while I may not legally be allowed to directly quote the paper, reasonable use allows me to summarize for you.

And as always, your reading is bad, since I did include one quote out of the paper:

“Corporal punishment is the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain but not injury for the purposes of correction or control of the child’s behavior”

Since, you know, people were saying that they didn't properly define corporal punishment... lol.

That is one direct quote I DID use.

We all knew you were just going to make excuses if I did what you wanted me to though.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyway, here's one section of the paper I am legally allowed to quote, part of the references section. Here, have a section of the B's:

*Baer, D. J., & Corrado, J. J. (1974). Heroin addict relationships with
parents during childhood and early adolescent years. Journal of Genetic
Psychology, 124, 99–103.
*Bakshi, A. (1994). Early family experience, chronic peer rejection in
school, and overgeneralized social problem solving as predictors of
child adjustment at age seven (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Tennessee at Knoxville, 1993). Dissertation Abstracts International,
54(09), 4939B.
Baldwin, A. L., Baldwin, C., & Cole, R. E. (1990). Stress-resistant families
and stress-resistant children. In J. Rolf, A. S. Masten, D. Cicchetti, K. H.
Nuechternlein, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the
development of psychopathology (pp. 257–280). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt,
Rinehart, & Winston.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall.
Bandura, A., & Huston, A. C. (1961). Identification as a process of
incidental learning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63,
311–318.
Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression
through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social
Psychology, 63, 575–582.
*Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1959). Adolescent aggression. New York:
Ronald Press.
Bank, L., Forgatch, M. S., Patterson, G. R., & Fetrow, R. A. (1993).
Parenting practices of single mothers: Mediators of negative contextual
factors. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55, 371–384.
*Barnett, D., Kidwell, S. L., & Leung, K. H. (1998). Parenting and
preschooler attachment among low-income urban African-American
families. Child Development, 69, 1657–1671. Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., & Dodge, K. A. (1995). Family and child factors
in stability and change in children’s aggressiveness in elementary
school. In J. McCord (Ed.), Coercion and punishment in long-term
perspectives (pp. 124–138). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., Dodge, K. A., & Ridge, B. (1998). Interaction of
temperamental resistance to control and restrictive parenting in the
development of externalizing behavior. Developmental Psychology, 34,
982–995.
Baum, C. G., & Forehand, R. (1981). Long term follow-up assessment of
parent training by use of multiple construct measures. Behavior Therapy,
12, 643–652.
Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of
preschool behavior. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 75, 43–88.
Baumrind, D. (1972). An exploratory study of socialization effects on
Black children: Some Black–White comparisons. Child Development,
43, 261–267.
Baumrind, D. (1996a). A blanket injunction against disciplinary use of
spanking is not warranted by the data. Pediatrics, 98(4, Pt. 2), 828–831.
Baumrind, D. (1996b). The discipline controversy revisited. Family Relations,
45, 405–415.
Baumrind, D. (1997). Necessary distinctions. Psychological Inquiry, 8,
176–182.
Baumrind, D., & Black, A. E. (1967). Socialization practices associated
with dimensions of competence in preschool boys and girls. Child
Development, 38, 291–327.
*Bean, A. W., & Roberts, M. W. (1981). The effect of time-out release
contingencies on changes in child noncompliance. Journal of Abnormal
Child Psychology, 9, 95–105.
Becker, W. C. (1964). Consequences of different models of parental
discipline. In M. L. Hoffman & L. W. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child
development research (Vol. 1, pp. 169–208). New York: Sage. Becker, W. C., & Krug, R. S. (1964). A circumplex model for social
behavior in children. Child Development, 35, 371–396.
*Becker, W. C., Peterson, D. R., Luria, Z., Shoemaker, D. J., & Hellmer,
L. A. (1962). Relations of factors derived from parent-interview ratings
to behavior problems of five-year-olds. Child Development, 33, 509–
535.
Bell, R. Q., & Chapman, M. (1986). Child effects in studies using experimental
or brief longitudinal approaches to socialization. Developmental
Psychology, 22, 595–603.
Belsky, J. (1984). The determinants of parenting: A process model. Child
Development, 55, 83–96.
Belsky, J. (1993). Etiology of child maltreatment: A developmental–
ecological analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 413–434.
Belsky, J. (1997). Variation in susceptibility to environmental influence:
An evolutionary argument. Psychological Inquiry, 8, 182–186.
Berkowitz, L. (1983). Aversively stimulated aggression: Some parallels
and differences in research with animals and humans. American Psychologist,
38, 1135–1144.
Berndt, T. J. (1996). Transitions in friendship and friends’ influence. In
J. A. Graber, J. Brooks-Gunn, & A. C. Petersen (Eds.), Transitions
through adolescence: Interpersonal domains and context (pp. 57–84).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Betancourt, H., & Lopez, S. R. (1993). The study of culture, ethnicity, and
race in American psychology. American Psychologist, 48, 629–637.
Biernat, M., & Wortman, C. (1991). Sharing of home responsibilities
between professionally employed women and their husbands. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 423–440.
Bitensky, S. H. (1998). Spare the rod, embrace our humanity: Toward a
new legal regime prohibiting corporal punishment of children. University
of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 31, 353–474.
Bluestone, C., & Tamis-LeMonda, C. S. (1999). Correlates of parenting
styles in predominantly working- and middle-class African American
mothers. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 881–893.
Brenner, V., & Fox, R. A. (1998). Parental discipline and behavior problems
in young children. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 159, 251–256.
Brenner, V., Nicholson, B. C., & Fox, R. A. (1999). Evaluation of a
community-based parenting program with the parents of young children.
Early Child Development and Care, 148, 1–9.
Bretherton, I., Golby, B., & Cho, E. (1997). Attachment and the transmission
of values. In J. E. Grusec & L. Kuczynski (Eds.), Parenting and
children’s internalization of values: A handbook of contemporary theory
(pp. 103–134). New York: Wiley.
Brody, G. H., & Shaffer, D. R. (1982). Contributions of parents and peers
to children’s moral socialization. Developmental Review, 2, 31–75.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1958). Socialization and social class through time and
space. In E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.),
Readings in social psychology (pp. 400–425). New York: Holt, Rinehart,
& Winston.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human
development. American Psychologist, 32, 513–531.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human
development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22,
723–742.
Bryan, J. W., & Freed, F. W. (1982). Corporal punishment: Normative data
and sociological and psychological correlates in a community college
population. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 11, 77–87.
Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models:
Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bugental, D. B., & Goodnow, J. J. (1998). Socialization processes. In W.
Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th
ed., pp. 389–462). New York: Wiley.
Burt, C. (1925). The young delinquent. New York: Appleton.
*Burton, R. V., Maccoby, E. E., & Allinsmith, W. (1961). Antecedents of
resistance to temptation in four-year-old children. Child Development,
32, 689–710.
Buss, D. M. (1981). Predicting parent–child interactions from children’s
activity level. Developmental Psychology, 17, 59–65.

[Stone the Crow]

As pointed out by someone before, while I may not legally be allowed to directly quote the paper...

WRONG.

Blah blah blah

Google beat you again.
https://www.coursehero.com/file/p4h4...s-of-corporal/

Still waiting.