Get help from the best in academic writing.

Spanking in Developmental Psychology ccusa autobiographical essay help Sociology essay help

Children are the fragile individuals that will make up the future and their psychological functioning needs to be maintained, which proves the importance of the topic. Anything used in a child’s life can be subjected to questioning, which includes spanking. In this paper, I will talk about the vague definitions found amongst research, other forms of discipline and the effectiveness, and factors that are more likely to contribute to behavioral problems that were overlooked in all research.

Despite the points I’m about to make, many scientists have argued that spanking could contribute to detrimental behavioral problems for children, which could inhibit their ability to have positive social and psychological experiences. However, I believe when used as a controlled form of discipline or physical punishment, spanking has no harmful effects on children. Spanking Surfaces as Problem Until the 1990’s, spanking was commonly used among mothers as a primary form of discipline.

An article by Julie Scelfo (2007) showed that in 1988, two-thirds of mothers with children under the age of 6 routinely spanked their child at least three times a week. (2007) National surveys from the later 70’s, early 80’s showed that more than 90 percent of parents spanked their 3-year olds. By the 1990’s however, it was widely agreed in the medical community that corporal punishment was not as effective as other disciplinary techniques and may have harmful side effects. 2007) At the time of the article, over 2,000 parents were asked if they spanked their child and only 9 percent admitted hitting their children ages 2 to 11 years. These results indicate that either spanking is not being used as a form of discipline anymore or those that do spank their children feel compelled to keep it a secret because of society’s implications of spanking. Research has recently been surfacing however, that spanking may not be as harmful as researchers are indicating. Spanking as a Cause of Behavioral Problems Among Children?

According to a study from the University of New Hampshire, it was found that punishment was linked to behavioral problems for children. The article examined a group from a longitudinal study that had been conducted since 1991 and consisted of over 2,000 mothers and children. (Mulvaney & Mebert, 2007) Through a series of home observations and interviews with the mothers, the researchers determined that corporal punishment was linked to increases in child aggression and other externalizing problems, which were never specified. 2007) The researchers argued that even though the data collection was formed through home observations and could contain biases, the fact that behavioral problems still surfaced is a significant finding. The researchers were adamant in their conclusions that corporal punishment is causing serious behavioral problems in children and needs to be eliminated from the disciplinary world. Research opposing spanking was common, but many questions arose considering the validity of the articles. Limitations of Study Unfortunately, this study also lacks validity and many details are distorted to support their theory.

For instance, the study itself recognizes the influence of third variables on their finding, highlighting maternal depression and child temperament. These variables aren’t even considered in their results as influencing the findings and were only briefly mentioned at the beginning of the article. Perhaps the real issues in child behavioral problems are home environment and child temperament, not spanking. The authors did not recognize the difference between spanking and corporal punishment, which would blur many boundaries that need to be specified and will be later in the paper.

These boundaries are essential to separate all forms of corporal punishment from spanking itself. Without this the literature will include all forms of corporal punishment, which will influence the results. Along with these issues, the sample used in the longitudinal study consisted of primarily higher income, higher education levels, and Caucasian individuals. The sample could potentially sway the results due to a lack of ethnic diversity. For example, it is proven that African American mothers use harsher discipline on their children and behavioral problems are not found among those children. Pinderhughes et al. , 2000) These differences in ethnicity are not recognized in the researcher’s results, which could potentially influence the findings in a different direction. These issues, along with vague definitions, have influenced research for years without any scrutiny. I will further evaluate on the research supporting spanking while also finally finding a proper definition that should be used as a template for each article. Defining Research Terms is Imperative

According to a study concerning the association between harsh punishment and child behavioral problems, the real problem not being addressed is how researchers should define disciplinary terms in their literature. In this case, controlled spanking is a term that is essential to define before the other points are addressed. Many studies use corporal punishment and spanking interchangeably while also blending aspects of harsh punishment when these terms are all completely different. The Merriam-Webster Encyclopedia defines spanking as, “a form of corporal punishment usually consisting of striking the buttocks (used as a form of punishment). Turkheimer and colleagues (2006) defined corporal punishment as, “physical force with the intention of causing the child to experience pain, but not injury, for the purpose of the correction of the child’s behavior. ” Harsh punishment entails severe or cruel forms of punishment, leaning to physical abuse, in order to correct the child’s behavior. (2006) These definitions are not specified in the articles increasing the likelihood of invalid results and ambiguous information making distorted claims about spanking.

Although the definitions have many similarities that make them easy to blend together, they will yield different results among the researcher that are imperative to recognize. Turkheimer and Colleagues Twin Study- Differential Treatment as a Factor When properly defined however, the study found that no harmful effects were linked to spanking even with differential treatment among siblings examined. Turkheimer and colleagues (2006) wanted to understand whether children who reported more harsh punishment than their siblings also reported more behavior problems between and within twin families.

The Australian study consisted of over 7,000 twin pairs born between 1918 and 1961. (2006) The reason for choosing this demographic was due to the immense numbers and availability of information of this sample. Through a series of questionnaires concerning health risk behaviors (smoking, substance abuse), personality, school performance, delinquency, forms of punishment used by parents, and mental disorders measured with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). (2006) Many variables were looked at to determine the effects of punishment on siblings as I have listed.

It was found that, even with differential treatment among siblings, controlled spanking was not linked with negative behavioral outcomes among children. This was very surprising for the researchers who predicted that differential treatment among siblings would increase the likelihood of behavioral problems when paired with spanking, which makes sense. Researchers predicted that these feelings of envy towards the unpunished sibling and frustration would further increase these behavioral problems that were linked to spanking. It was found however, that harsh punishment was significantly linked to child behavioral problems. 2006) The distinction between controlled spanking and harsh punishment was imperative in the validity of the results. This distinction was not recognized in the previous article, which leads me to believe that the results included characteristics of spanking and harsh punishment in their findings. The current article has minute limitations however, that will be discussed next. Limitations of Study Turkheimer and colleagues (2006) had significant findings that should be considered when arguing against spanking, but also included limitations.

The sample population was of little ethnic diversity and was based in a different culture and country (Australia), but the findings should raise some important questions for American researchers. Could this study, if replicated, yield similar results? Are researchers ignoring the imperative definitions needed to eliminate third variables and solidify their results for the general population? This study suggests that yes; these definitions are needed and can be used in American literature. Turkheimer and colleagues iscovered significant results for the world of spanking and the definitions found in the article need to be recognized among other researchers. When looking at the general picture, the limitations found in the study are minute considering the lack of validity in the other studies against spanking. Third Variables are the Problem in Research To further counteract the previous study against spanking, I must shift the attention from spanking to the third variables. If all studies against spanking would remove the third variables influencing the results, spanking would have a different reputation.

In a study conducted at the University of Michigan it was found that, when linked with positive maternal emotional support, spanking had no detrimental effects on children. (McLoyd & Smith, 2002) The sample was a subset of the children from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth and consisted of over 1,000 diverse individuals including Hispanics, African Americans, and European Americans. The children were measured through change in the Behavior Problems Index, home observations, interviews, and maternal emotional support was measured on a five-item scale known as the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment. 2002) Once all variables were removed, (maternal emotional support and income) it was found that African American children had the lowest average level of behavioral problems with a smaller increase over time. These findings are fairly consistent across the racial-ethnic groups, however. Although these findings suggest that behavior problems were found among children whose spanking increased over time, when paired with emotional support, findings were counteracted. McLoyd & Smith (2002) suggest that emotional support may moderate the impact of spanking by influencing the child’s interpretation of physical discipline.

The child may be less likely to view spanking as unjust and harsh when the parent-child relationship is warm and supportive. Thus, if a child were spanked in a healthy home environment, no harmful effects would be found. Assuming parents desire to provide a healthy, positive home environment, spanking will not have an effect among those families. Spanking cannot be looked at alone in a home environment because there will always be third variables to consider. Maternal emotional support, child temperament, and other factors will also contribute to the child’s psychosocial development.

Although discipline is an important factor in the development of the child, the other factors listed above have greater impact. Those who oppose spanking may disagree with the research I have surfaced. The reality is that much present research is not accounting for crucial variables that are more likely to influence what the researchers are hoping to find. Limitations to the current study include the mother’s disclosure of spanking instances and child behavior, which could create biases. The fact is however; there are few ways to collect such information without the presence of biases.

In research the main concern should be to recognize those biases and factor them into the results. Despite opposing claims, perhaps home environment, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and parental stress are the real problems rather than just spanking. Third Variable Effects on Punishment- Pinderhughes and Colleagues Pinderhughes and colleagues (2000) found the factors listed above have a great impact on the frequency and degree of discipline in the household. Participants included 585 families, with both parents participating in 393 cases, based in two cohorts in Tennessee. 2000) The sample included adoptive and stepmothers and fathers along with White, African American, and a category for “other” ethnic diversities. Through a series of interviews and questionnaires, regression analyses revealed cross-situation consistency in relations between cognitive-emotional processes and physical punishment and severity of punishment. (2000) In other words, parental stress in the household affects the degree and frequency of physical punishment, which is consistent between mothers and fathers.

Results also showed that European American families, compared to African American families, made fewer hostile attributions about their child and endorsed less severe punishment. (2000) Once these factors can be established as influencing discipline, research can further examine the validity of past studies. The past research has found it almost impossible to eliminate the distal factors found in each household that influence the child’s development. With so many factors influencing discipline and children’s development, spanking cannot be blamed for behavioral problems.

Alternate Forms of Discipline as a Solution? Many researchers opposing spanking have claimed that alternate forms of discipline have proven to be more effective and enhance positive development for the child. According to a study examining other forms of discipline, this may not be the case. Larzelere and Kuhn (2005) performed a meta-analysis of over 20 studies on this same issue. Results showed that other forms of discipline including time-outs and reasoning were not as effective as controlled spanking.

Controlled spanking was found to also reduce defiance and antisocial behavior among children. (2005) Physical punishment was separated into four different categories according to their degree of punishment. For example, conditional spanking was spanking that was given only for certain situations (when a child refuses to comply with time-out, for example). Analyses also found that controlled spanking doesn’t enhance positive development for the child, but it also doesn’t surface any problems.

Larzelere and Kuhn (2005) concluded that the best form of punishment is controlled spanking with reasoning so the child can understand why the discipline was administered, which is beneficial for the child. Those opposing this study would claim that a meta-analysis is not a sufficient way to collect information. With the other research I’ve presented, I believe this study to be a satisfactory addition because of the insight into many different studies also supporting my position.

Individuals opposing spanking may believe they are the mainstream now with the majority of research on spanking being against it, but this study provides the evidence needed to counteract that belief. Although it was still difficult to find information on my position, the research I did find was valid and brought up many questions that are imperative in future research on spanking. With the information provided, when used a controlled form of discipline or physical punishment, it is easy to see that spanking has no harmful effects on children.

Because of vague definitions, focus being on the wrong distal factors, and supposed effectiveness of other forms of discipline; spanking has developed a negative reputation. Although there is a line between controlled spanking and harsh punishment, these terms are rarely recognized as being separate forms of discipline. Even using corporal punishment as the broad term in research has damaging effects on the audience’s view of the research. Grouping spanking with such an extensive term is broadening the way for opposing views. Implications and Applications for Future Research

My position has further been supported with the information provided. I have shown that terms used in research need to be defined in order to validate future research and also research that used specific definitions found results in favor of spanking. Also, home environment and other distal factors are the real problem in causing behavioral problems among children. Spanking is a minute part of the household and although discipline is important for the child’s development, the focus is not being put on other factors as often as it should.

This was brought up because of the countless numbers of third variables found in research against spanking. I found it difficult to consider the research valid when third variables were so apparent in all the research and was hardly recognized. The information for spanking has many implications for future research and families. Those who pushed to ban spanking should now consider the research provided and shift their attention to other, more influential, factors in the household contributing to children’s behavioral problems.

Families may now be able to punish their children as they have for decades without being under the scrutiny of society. Future research may be able to validate their results because of the present research surfacing for spanking. Future research may also be able to have universal definitions, which could increase the reliability of all research. This would change the world of research if applied to all concepts because it would create a template and basis for all research to start from. With so many third variables in the disciplinary theme, anything to create a universal template is imperative.

24 hour shift vs 12 hour shifts. Which is the most efficient/beneficial in the fire/ems service?

24 hour shift vs 12 hour shifts. Which is the most efficient/beneficial in the fire/ems service?.

24 hour shift vs 12 hour shifts. Which is the most efficient/beneficial in the fire/ems service? So i was basically going to talk about the difference between working a 24 hour shift in the fire/ems service and working a 12 hour shift in the service. Which is more beneficial for the workers health? Sleep schedule, ect… which one provides an easier shift change. Stuff like that there are alot of research out there on why some places do 24 hour shifts and why some do 12 hour shifts. No . Coms everything has to be a reliable website for my 3 sources. Like . Edus

Essay Help “>Essay Help