Study: Spanking increases childhood defiance and mental health issues

[Tuesdays]

Overly Strict != Spanking

Just wanted to clarify that. They are not mutually exclusive.

I'd go as far as to say helicopter moms are just as dangerous to a child as someone who goes above and beyond in whipping their child for any little discretion.

Overly strict, isn't the same as abusive.

[Spectral]

Researchers don't just NOT publish their studies if it doesn't match the original hypothesis.

Yeah, this actually does happen all the time. Perfectly good research gets rejected for being insufficient in originality or impact. If you're under the impression that there isn't a problem of negative results (or just uninteresting results) going unpublished, you really need to start paying attention to the issues with publication bias and other issues that are making repicability a nightmare (and not just in psychology).

People don't realize that meta analysis of hundreds of studies including a total of 160,000 patients will have a massive variety, and when there are very obvious and strong indicators of a certain trend from such a massive pool, there's no excuses that can be made for sampling bias or much else.

This just in - large meta-analysis is never wrong! Right

Predisposition for violence based off nature in individuals as opposed to nurture can create a margin of error, but as we know, margin of error also decreases the larger the sampling size.

If an observed effect is a result of nature, cranking up the sample size isn't really going to help reverse that chain of causality. Without some really impressive genetic work tied in, that causal analysis is going to be implausible.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Yeah, this actually does happen all the time. Perfectly good research gets rejected for being insufficient in originality or impact. If you're under the impression that there isn't a problem of negative results (or just uninteresting results) going unpublished, you really need to start paying attention to the issues with publication bias and other issues that are making repicability a nightmare (and not just in psychology).

They don't get published for those reasons, yes, but not because the answer to the hypothesis is unexpected, like the person I was quoting originally seemed to believe. In fact, the most revolutionary and ground breaking papers ever published are the ones that completely blew the original hypothesis to pieces. The unexpected answers are the most interesting.

You forget, we have a lot of people in here who believe that climate change science is only conclusive because dissenting studies are being suppressed by the Illuminati. Their entire "trust" in science is shattered because science has found some uncomfortable truths that they simply don't agree with.

[Spectral]

They don't get published for those reasons, yes, but not because the answer to the hypothesis is unexpected, like the person I was quoting originally seemed to believe. In fact, the most revolutionary and ground breaking papers ever published are the ones that completely blew the original hypothesis to pieces. The unexpected answers are the most interesting.

His point is still entirely relevant - if someone hypothesizes that spanking has an effect and finds that it doesn't seem to do much of anything, that isn't getting published.

- - - Updated - - -

This snippet from the article is kinda dumb:

Gershoff notes that this persistence of spanking is in spite of the fact that there is no clear evidence of positive effects from spanking...

I suggest this good ol' journal article as an antidote to this sort of thinking.

[Cthulhu 2020]

People love science when its conclusiveness brings them awesome stuff like computers, smart phones, satellites, radio, television, advanced medical technology, and tons of other things that make their life easier. Awesome!!!! Science is so cool!

When it's some uncomfortable truth, the full on denial blinders get switched on.

The study did find that those most often spanked were also more likely to very strongly defend its practice, so that has its own interesting implications for this thread.


But come on Spectral, do you find it completely unbelievable that spanking would lead people to defend domestic violence from their partner?

[Spectral]

The study did find that those most often spanked were also more likely to very strongly defend its practice, so that has its own interesting implications for this thread.

To be clear, I'm not much invested in the object-level question. I don't care that much. If I had kids, I wouldn't expect to hit them. It's probably not helpful. I'm skeptical of extremely judicious use of spanking being particularly harmful either. If we see effects, I'd wager that the effect size only becomes noticeable when the parents are basically a bunch of degenerates. Philosophically, I would say that I would only ever even want to strike a child if they put themselves in direct, terrible danger. Striking a kid over not cleaning or something is just fucked up.

I don't really care much though - the circles I travel in are basically the sorts of hyper-educated, uber-liberal sorts that tear up at having to take anything from their children (and that's mostly for the best - I like these people)..

But come on Spectral, do you find it completely unbelievable that spanking would lead people to defend domestic violence from their partner?

Of course not. I'd expect that to be the case. That's why I said this:

I wouldn't be at all surprised by a feedback loop that increases this relationship [spanking:violence/problems].

I'm just really disinclined to oversell things that just so happen to line up with the prevailing wisdom of the sorts of people that are in academia in the first place. That doesn't make it false, it just makes it suspect when it's touted as, "come on guys, it's a SCIENTIFIC FACT, everyone just needs to learn it". This isn't exactly the sort of physical fact about the world that gets found in biochemistry.

[Cthulhu 2020]

His point is still entirely relevant - if someone hypothesizes that spanking has an effect and finds that it doesn't seem to do much of anything, that isn't getting published.

If you have a university grant to publish results, you publish them even if inconclusive. A lot of the sources studied had inconclusive results.

If you have a think tank grant, then yeah, you don't publish results they don't want.

It's why I've always considered think tank studies to be complete and utter shite. And it's hilarious that those who don't trust science will so quickly trust the results of a think tank study.

If you really want, I can give you the list of studies included, and the MASSIVE CV's of the researchers.

[Spectral]

If you have a university grant to publish results, you publish them even if inconclusive. A lot of the sources studied had inconclusive results.

File-drawer effect is still a thing. No one's even able to publish studies that don't have some takeaway message.

If you really want, I can give you the list of studies included, and the MASSIVE CV's of the researchers.

I don't have the time to comb through them, inclination to do so, or expertise to provide any useful critique. Besides, this is literally an appeal to authority.

[HumbleDuck]

Spanking children is by definition physical abuse, and yet some people here are defending it. How that's possible in this day and age is beyond me.

[Incredibale]

More science falsely so called. Spare the road, spoil the child .

[Kasierith]

Luckily for us, this "one study" is actually a meta-analysis of hundreds of studies.

Know what a meta-analysis is?

The lowest common denominator of studies for establishing significance, since you throw all aspects of establishing power and meaningful primary outcomes out the window in favor of bulking up data. If I had presented a meta-study alone at any of the numerous P&T committees that I presented at, both to argue for and against the addition/removal of drugs from formularies, I would have likely been suspended or expelled as an embarrassment to the university. A meta study is, at best, a superficial overview demonstrating the general trend of the information within, but without the means to establish any measure of causation because it is not oriented around establishing causation or significant impact. And Batman, by its very nature, a meta-study has very poor to nonexistent controls because of the disparate information contained within.

- - - Updated - - -

File-drawer effect is still a thing. No one's even able to publish studies that don't have some takeaway message.

I don't have the time to comb through them, inclination to do so, or expertise to provide any useful critique. Besides, this is literally an appeal to authority.

I mean, at least in pharmacology, a lack of significant impact is still a takeaway message. Current cholesterol guidelines are defined specifically by a lack of significant impact in LDL oriented dosing on lifespan. And even in situations where a significant change was not found, many authors use it to demonstrate a potential trend to encourage further studies into the matter, but with different controls or methodology... if a study simply falls apart, it's much harder to get a follow up study going for it.

[Aori]

People without kids commenting on this are cute.

Batman do you have kids...

How these threads always go.

Just like every study posted on the subject is based on correlation. Now we supposedly have a study based on these studies and its somehow better.

[May90]

When my child is throwing a tantrum and won't stop, guess whats coming? A spanking. I'm not going to let my child run around like a fucking savage.

Nice: acting like a fucking savage in order to prevent your kid from acting like a fucking savage. That's some high quality parentage right there!

[Katie N]

There's nothing wrong with disciplining a kid that is behaving badly.

[Aori]

Nice: acting like a fucking savage in order to prevent your kid from acting like a fucking savage. That's some high quality parentage right there!

You sit down with a toddler while they're throwing a tantrum and tell them why its wrong, let me know how it goes.

[zenkai]

Seriously, who still spanks there kids?

I bet there's a study for that to.

https://www.iusb.edu/ugr-journal/static/2001/gragas.php

huh, weird. People spanks their kids multiple times a week? What the hell is that about?

edit: I was spanked till I noticed it didn't hurt and mentioned it mid spank to my father. First painful rather than scary spanking, and last spanking. I won't pretend not to be a little screwy.

Parents that care, note I am talking about spanking not beating, not hitting a child out of anger.

People who don't understand how to discipline a child or think spanking is bad for them, please don't breed.

[JohnBrown1917]

Still waiting on a study that isn't based on conjecture.

When my child is throwing a tantrum and won't stop, guess whats coming? A spanking. I'm not going to let my child run around like a fucking savage.

Or you keep him/her in his room.

[Kasierith]

Or you keep him/her in his room.

Isn't that pretty much a reward in an age dominated by books, computers, phones, and what not?

[JohnBrown1917]

Parents that care, note I am talking about spanking not beating, not hitting a child out of anger.

People who don't understand how to discipline a child or think spanking is bad for them, please don't breed.

Seems a lot of people disagree.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpor...aws_by_country

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't that pretty much a reward in an age dominated by books, computers, phones, and what not?

Take those away?
And why keep a pc in your little kids room?


Besides the books, seems odd to discourage a kid from reading.

[The Whimsical Dwarf]

Spanking is literally the parent taking their own rage out on their children. Positive reinforcement, like having your child earn money by getting good grades and doing chores works wonders. Also, if you actually talk to your child and do things with them they are less likely to act out. If you only give your children attention when they are bad, they will continue to be bad.