Study: Spanking increases childhood defiance and mental health issues

[Cthulhu 2020]

WRONG.

You... do realize that studies that have become part of public domain can be openly quoted?

It's also funny that your link blurs out every part of the paper but a small section of sources, rofl.

Seems we were all right, I prove it and you start making up excuses. But I called it pages ago.

[JohnBrown1917]

cba with 32 pages, but what is this argument even about?

[May90]

<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!

Expected reaction. You are quite predictable, mate!

[Stone the Crow]

You... do realize that studies that have become part of public domain can be openly quoted?

Helpful Link. That totally real university you're in is really doing you good!

Edit: Since I'm sure you're not going to read that as you're too busy trying to Google, here's a summary. Emphasis mine.

"In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to discuss, comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work."

It's also funny that your link blurs out every part of the paper but a small section of sources, rofl.

You mean like the same part you quoted? What are the odds! (Nevermind that was just one of the 237512385129357128351 such links Google responded with. Which, of course, you already know about since that's where you got it.)


Annnnnd still waiting.

[RyanEX]

So abusing the child is more about making you feel better, rather than exercising proper discipline?

Spanking is not abuse. So stop saying that it is. Hitting a child for no reason is abuse. Spanking is about letting the child know that they crossed a line.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Oh thanks, seems my ass is covered since this is a discussion about it.

Seven study characteristics were coded for each study to be
used in moderator analyses: (a) study design (experimental,
longitudinal, cross-sectional, or retrospective); (b) measure of
spanking (observation, parent report, child report, child retrospective,
or both parent and child reports); (c) index of spanking
(when used [either observed or in an experiment], frequency,
frequency and severity, ever in time period, or ever in life); (d)
independence of the raters of spanking and the child outcome
(same rater or different raters); (e) time period in which spanking
was administered (observed, last week, last month, last
year, ever, hypothetical, specific time period, or not specified);
(f) the country in which the study was conducted (U.S. or other
than U.S.); and (g) the age range of children at the time of
spanking (less than 2-years-old, 2- to 5-years-old, 6- to 10-
years-old, and 11- to 15-years-old). The authors independently
coded these characteristics for each study. Any discrepancies
were resolved through discussion.

Want more?

As the effect sizes and bar graphs in Table 1 indicate, the
findings across studies were highly consistent. Of the 111 individual
effect sizes, 102 were in the direction of a detrimental outcome
with 78 of these statistically significant. In contrast, nine of the
effect sizes were in the direction of a beneficial outcome but only
one (Tennant, Detels, & Clark, 1975) was statistically different
from zero. Thus, among the 79 statistically significant effect sizes,
99% indicated an association between spanking and a detrimental
child outcome.
Table 2 summarizes the mean weighted effect sizes and confidence
intervals for each outcome along with a Z test for significant
difference from zero and an I
2 statistic that estimates the amount of
variation in the mean weight effect size that was attributable to
underlying study heterogeneity. Spanking was significantly associated
with 13 of the 17 outcomes examined. In each case, spanking
was associated with a greater likelihood of detrimental child
outcomes. In childhood, parental use of spanking was associated
with low moral internalization, aggression, antisocial behavior,
externalizing behavior problems, internalizing behavior problems,
mental health problems, negative parent– child relationships, impaired
cognitive ability, low self-esteem, and risk of physical
abuse from parents. In adulthood, prior experiences of parental use
of spanking were significantly associated with adult antisocial
behavior, adult mental health problems, and with positive attitudes
about spanking. The remaining four meta-analyses were not significantly
different from zero. The 13 statistically significant mean
effect sizes ranged in size from .15 to .64. The overall mean
weighted effect size across all of the 111 study-level effect sizes
was d .33, with a 95% confidence interval of .29 to .38; this
mean effect was statistically different from zero, Z 14.84, p 
.001.

Also funny how a study conducted on the EXACT SAME SUBJECT by the EXACT SAME AUTHORS would use many of the same sources.

[May90]

Spanking is not abuse. So stop saying that it is. Hitting a child for no reason is abuse. Spanking is about letting the child know that they crossed a line.

Oh, so just hitting a child is abuse, but hitting a child because you think they crossed the line - is not? Nice! I wonder how it would work if applied to all other sides of our life... Would be quite a world we live in.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Also funny how Crow's fully expected response would be to mash what I quote into google. Gloriously predictable.

[Espe]

Spanking is about letting the child know that they crossed a line.

Spanking is about teaching the child that force is an acceptable reaction when someone annoys you enough. It's the go-to solution for the victims of abuse, the overworked, the overstressed and those who never should have been parents in the first place.

That's exactly the point of this study and those like it which have shown it causes serious behavioral issues later in life.

This thread alone provides plenty of prime examples. Take a look for yourself.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Spanking is about teaching the child that force is an acceptable reaction when someone annoys you enough. It's the go-to solution for the victims of abuse, the overworked, the overstressed and those who never should have been parents in the first place.

That's exactly the point of this study and those like it which have shown it causes serious behavioral issues later in life.

This thread alone provides plenty of prime examples. Take a look for yourself.

It's rather sad though, since those who were spanked are far more likely to justify physical abuse used against them by their partner. For the longest time we did not understand fully why people (male or female) would justify and defend their partner beating them. Now we have a good idea at least one of the reasons they do.

[Espe]

It's rather sad though, since those who were spanked are far more likely to justify physical abuse used against them by their partner. For the longest time we did not understand fully why people (male or female) would justify and defend their partner beating them. Now we have a good idea at least one of the reasons they do.

That makes more sense than any other explanation for that type of behavior I have ever read. They're hardwired to find it acceptable.

[Stone the Crow]

Also funny how Crow's fully expected response would be to mash what I quote into google. Gloriously predictable.

Nah, I just wanted to make sure you actually blew the $12 to get access to it, rather than just quoting the various blurbs available on Google.

Quite content for now, as I'm tired of double-checking. So now you can safely join whateverhisname is on the Ignore list while I continue to get a great laugh at how you felt you had to waste money on something in order to try and convince people you weren't the liar you were. XD Have fun bashing in the wall of your mom's spare bedroom, Neckbeard McQuack!

Took forever but totally worth the effort! XD

Infracted for flaming

[TITAN308]

Meh, The Batman isn't a bad guy. That was sort of mean.

[Cthulhu 2020]

That makes more sense than any other explanation for that type of behavior I have ever read. They're hardwired to find it acceptable.

Yeah, I've said it for a long time now, but spankings more than likely cause a host of negative consequences. I was uncertain for awhile whether or not they did actually create compliance, and that seemed up in the air to me (although I didn't follow the research on it closely, it was apparently settled that it did not long ago). So it seems that not only does it cause kids to act out more to test whether or not they get caught, it teaches them how to be defiant and AVOID getting caught, rather than teaching them not to do things.

Other techniques of non-physical discipline such as revoking privileges, and positive reinforcement produce MUCH better results. And even other negative forms of punishment have shaky results, again, teaching kids how not to get caught. Positive reinforcement, goal setting, benchmarks for good behavior have far better results. One thing they do emphasize is the need for CONSISTENCY. That seems to be the one thing they believe affects discipline effectiveness the most. If you aren't consistent in either punishment or reward, then it doesn't work anyway.

The funny part is that... as much as people take issue with comparing kids to dogs, this research is all INCREDIBLY almost identical to the results of dog training. Physical punishment, pinch collars, shock collars all create aggression issues in dogs, and only make the dogs tenuously obedient while around their owners, but they resort to acting out when the owner is not around. And that's assuming the owner is incredibly consistent. Lack of consistency produce disastrous results in dogs. They just become confused and non compliant.

[Dug]

Fuckin hell this Stone dude is an unpleasant person. Makes Orlong look like a rational individual lmao

[Cthulhu 2020]

Meh, The Batman isn't a bad guy. That was sort of mean.

Apparently school VPN's don't exist, and he's convinced himself that he made me spend $12. I even said while I was egging him on that I was making him dig a hole for himself that he could not get out of, and now that I showed him I wasn't bluffing, accessing my school's VPN for the article, he dances around like he won something. Let us reflect on the terrible logic and statements that he could not back up...

So, was there a control group in this study? I'm thinking "no." In fact, I doubt they asked one group of parents to spank their children and one not to, considering how unethical that would be all around. If not, how did they go about studying it then? Asking adults how they turned out and whether or not they were spanked? Do they have any evidence that their answers were truthful or even remotely accurate?

Hell, the study even gives a (generous) estimate that only 80% of the world's population uses spanking. So, does that mean that 80% of the population is somehow fucked up solely because they were spanked?

I mean, Jesus Christ, if you say that 80% of the population was spanked, and even did your study squarely on prisoners (with the logic that they indeed turned out bad), wouldn't expect at least 80% of them to say they were spanked as kids? And if so, what the fuck does that prove?

There's so much wrong with this whole thing. It's laughable to even call it a study. It reads more as a "finding the result we want and spinning the information in a way that we can sell more books about the virtues of wimpifying our species."

Well, except that you didn't address a single fucking thing I said with that worthless reply. Other than to (unintentionally) comfirm everything I said.

1.) No, there were no control groups, and there was no actual study.

2.) Instead, it was basically just a worthless fucking questionaire with zero research into whether or not the answers were correct, honest, or accurate (and yes, all three of those things are different).

3.) They had no way of knowing what was or wasn't a "physical disciplinary action that were considered abusive" except people's word on the subject.

4.) There seems to be no indication that they looked into other causes of why people allegedly turned out for the worse.

5.) It is indeed a worthless piece of shit "study" because of all three of those reasons. It might as well have been a fucking poll on a message forum asking "does drinking Kool-Aid make you a homicidal maniac? Because 80% of all homicidial maniacs have tasted Kool-Aid before; ergo, Kool-Aid makes you a homicidial maniac. Do you agree or not?"

So he was wrong, he didn't even make me spend money. And he's trying to create some silver lining that... he made me spend... $12? Which I guess is a lot to him. Although time is money, and I guess I just lost a lot of potential time replying to... oh who am I kidding, I post on MMO-C when waiting around for my company's jobs to come in. /neckbeard

I bet he doesn't believe people post from work either.

[Shadowferal]

Spanking isn't child abuse; it's common sense

Fear is essential to respect. Children won't do what we tell them to do, unless -- at some level -- they fear the consequences that will come from not doing it. Punishment isn't a bad word. It's a life lesson. It's the way the world works, and, as parents, it's our job to prepare our kids to enter a world where they learn bad behavior has consequences.

Too many parents today are falling down on the job. The problem isn't that too many kids get spanked. It's that some kids who need a spanking might never get one.

Too many kids in America don't respect their parents -- that's the real threat. They turn on the television and see shows where the kids run things and the parents are bumbling idiots. In fact, many kids don't fear any kind of authority, and this will not serve them well later in life. That's the real sin that many parents commit, neglecting their duty to raise good kids who grow up into respectful and responsible adults.

Spanking isn't child abuse. It's common sense. And that's something that every parent needs -- but, as you already know, not every parent has.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Spanking isn't child abuse; it's common sense

Fear is essential to respect. Children won't do what we tell them to do, unless -- at some level -- they fear the consequences that will come from not doing it. Punishment isn't a bad word. It's a life lesson. It's the way the world works, and, as parents, it's our job to prepare our kids to enter a world where they learn bad behavior has consequences.

Too many parents today are falling down on the job. The problem isn't that too many kids get spanked. It's that some kids who need a spanking might never get one.

Too many kids in America don't respect their parents -- that's the real threat. They turn on the television and see shows where the kids run things and the parents are bumbling idiots. In fact, many kids don't fear any kind of authority, and this will not serve them well later in life. That's the real sin that many parents commit, neglecting their duty to raise good kids who grow up into respectful and responsible adults.

Spanking isn't child abuse. It's common sense. And that's something that every parent needs -- but, as you already know, not every parent has.

Opinion pieces are cute.

[Shadowferal]

Opinion pieces are cute.

What's even cuter is citing science, when that shit never plays when it comes to responsible parenting.

[Espe]

Yeah, I've said it for a long time now, but spankings more than likely cause a host of negative consequences. I was uncertain for awhile whether or not they did actually create compliance, and that seemed up in the air to me (although I didn't follow the research on it closely, it was apparently settled that it did not long ago). So it seems that not only does it cause kids to act out more to test whether or not they get caught, it teaches them how to be defiant and AVOID getting caught, rather than teaching them not to do things.

Other techniques of non-physical discipline such as revoking privileges, and positive reinforcement produce MUCH better results. And even other negative forms of punishment have shaky results, again, teaching kids how not to get caught. Positive reinforcement, goal setting, benchmarks for good behavior have far better results. One thing they do emphasize is the need for CONSISTENCY. That seems to be the one thing they believe affects discipline effectiveness the most. If you aren't consistent in either punishment or reward, then it doesn't work anyway.

The funny part is that... as much as people take issue with comparing kids to dogs, this research is all INCREDIBLY almost identical to the results of dog training. Physical punishment, pinch collars, shock collars all create aggression issues in dogs, and only make the dogs tenuously obedient while around their owners, but they resort to acting out when the owner is not around. And that's assuming the owner is incredibly consistent. Lack of consistency produce disastrous results in dogs. They just become confused and non compliant.

Yeah I had done some reading on it when my niece was born and I was aware of the effectiveness debate but I never tied it to abusive relationships later in life.

Like I said, I feel bad for the kids who have to deal with the weakness and dysfunction of their parents. You can tell from some of the posts in this very thread that it definitely follows people through adulthood. I guess you just have to hope that their kids make it through the abuse and manage to break the chain when they are in a position to do things the right way.

It's just sad.