What The Research Says...
This is a brief overview of the results of several studies and findings based on meta-analyses.
Outcomes
Negative
*Solid conclusions cannot be drawn from the data due to the nature of the research*
There are an array of negative outcomes associated with CP.
Less moral internalization (Hoffman, 1983; Grusec, 1983)
Increased aggression (Coie and Dodge, 1998)
Delinquent, criminal, and antisocial behavior (Wilson and Herrnstein, 1985; see Gershoff, 2002 for more).
Decreased quality of the parent-child relationship (Azrin, Hake, Holz, & Hutchinson, 1965)
Increased likelihood that a child will become a victim of physical abuse (Garbarino, 1977)
Antisocial behavior (Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997) The probability that a parent will cross over from CP to abuse is 53% for one instance of CP happening when the child is 13 years old
Externalizing problems (Gunnoe & Mariner, 1997)
Lower competencies (Baumrind & Owens, 2000 as cited in Larzelere, 2000)
Mental health issues (McLoyd, Jayaratne, Ceballo, & Borquez, 1994)(Adams, 1995; Ellison, Musick, & Holden, 1998 as cited in Larzelere, 2000)
Increased likelihood of adult abuse of own child (Fry, 1993; Herronkohl, Herrenkohl, & Toedter, 1983 as cited in Gershoff, 2002) or spouse (Simons, Lin, and Gordon, 1998). Larzelere differentiates based on age, saying that “spanking of teenagers found increased rates of dating-partner abuse” (Larzelere, 2000, p. 208)
The only beneficial outcome noted by Gershoff (2002) was found by Newsom, Flavell, & Rincover (1983) showing increased immediate compliance. Larzelere (2000), on the other hand, presented
reduced noncompliance (Larzelere, Sather, Schneider, Larson, & Pike, 1998b),
reduced fighting (Larzelere & Merenda, 1994), and
enhanced parental nurturance and increased effectiveness of milder disciplinary tactics as results of spankings (Larzelere et al. (1998b).
Internal
There are other factors as to how CP will affect a child that depend on the child himself such as age, pain, and gender. Children from ages 10 to 12 (Frick, Christian, & Wootton,1999 as cited in Gershoff, 2002) or 7.5 to 10 (Larzelere, 1996 as cited in Larzelere, 2000) who are exposed to CP show stronger signs of associations with aggression. Beneficial effects are likely when the child was less than six years old (Larzelere, 1996 as cited in Larzelere, 2000). This shows that age may play a part in how a child internalizes the punishment. Another finding shows that any pain will elicit a desire in the child to get away from the stimulus, in this case the parent. Therefore, pain induced by CP will likely cause the child to attempt to get away from the parent. Pain can also cause anger and when the child is afraid or angry, it becomes more of a challenge for the parent to teach their children morals or build a close relationship with them (Gershoff, 2002). The gender of the child can also play a role. Straus et al. (1997) found that antisocial behavior was higher in boys than in girls.
There are some circumstances when a child will be more likely to accept the messages being taught to them by their parents. Children are more receptive to their parents' disciplines when they are in a good mood (Londerville & Main, 1981), acceptant of the discipline (Grusec & Goodnow, 1994), believe that the parent is acting in their best interest (Dix, 1992), and have a secure relationship with the parent (Deater-Deckard & Dodge, 1997), all as cited in Gershoff (2002). According to a study performed by Jaana Haapasalo and Richard E Tremblay (1994), even after a third variable was accounted for, “boys' perception of parental supervision and punishment appear to be good predictors of delinquency” (p. 1051). Larzelere (2000) showed that positive outcomes were most likely when the child was less than six years old (Larzelere, 1996 as cited in Larzelere, 2002) and when CP was used nonabusively, infrequently, as a back-up, and flexibly with other methods. Detrimental outcomes were found more often when mothers resorted to CP after having lost control of their anger (Straus & Mouradian, 1998 as cited in Larzelere, 2002).
Social-cultural norms play a role in the amount to which a child is affected. In a culture more accepting of CP, children may not perceive it as negative and therefore experience fewer negative effects (Gershoff, 2002). The outcomes of CP can vary depending on the family's race and/or religious affiliation. Detrimental outcomes were neutralized or reversed in both African Americans (Gunnoe & Mariner, 1997) and conservative Protestants (Ellison et al., 1997 as cited in Gershoff, 2002).
A study performed by Kirby Deater-Deckard, Kenneth A. Dodge, Johne E. Bates, and Gregory S. Pettit (1996) concluded that effects of CP on African American children differ from those of European American children. The ethnic group differences only hold true in the nonabusive range. However, harsh discipline, while detrimental to European American children, has an opposite effect on African Americans, although it is small. They conclude that the different views held on CP by minorities (that it is appropriate) is the reason behind the positive outcomes.
Straus et al. (1997) found that antisocial behavior associated with CP in European American children had a much smaller effect on African American children.
There were two major categories of variables that could potentially play a role in the effects caused by CP, the inclusion of overly severe and overly frequent use pf physical punishment (Baumrind, 2001; Deater-Deckard et al, 1996; Larzelere, 2000) and failure to control for original behavior problems (Baumrind, 2001; Larzelere, 2000).
In a study performed by Diana Baumrind (2001), children of families classified in the “Red Zone” (frequent punishment w/ at least some intensity) were “consistently much less competent and more maladjusted” than children in families using less frequency and intensity . The use of “more frequent than average” (Baumrind, 2001 p. 8 ques. #5) punishment resulted in children who were not maladjusted yet slightly less competent and well-adjusted than those who experienced “little or no physical punishment and no intensity” (Baumrind, 2001 p. 8 ques. #5).
Detrimental outcomes become significant at the point of 1 to 3 spankings occurring per week (Adams, 1995; Baumrind & Owens, 2000 as cited in Larzelere, 2000) and it was suggested that CP becomes too frequent when parents turn to it quickly as opposed to an alternative discipline. By removing these subjects, test results showed fewer or no detrimental outcomes than those who used CP with a normal frequency and severity (Larzelere, 2000).
Detrimental outcomes were never found in causally relevant studies if the child's original externalizing problems were ruled out (Larzelere, 2000). By controlling for previous child misbehavior, detrimental outcomes became insignificant (Baumrind, 2001).
Effects of Nonphysical Forms of Discipline
There have been studies testing the effects of other types of punishment such as ignoring, restraint, and grounding. It was found that similar results occurred with the use of nonphysical punishments (Baumrind & Owens, 2000; Larzelere & Smith, 2000 as cited in Larzelere, 2000). Detrimental outcomes were at about the same level as those resulting from verbal punishment (Baumrind, 2001). However, pairing verbal aggression with CP will likely cause more problems (Vissing, Straus, Gelles, & Harrop, 1991).
It was noted that grounding is a more beneficial punishment for teenagers rather than spankings (Caesar, 1988; Joubert, 1992; Larzelere, 1996 as cited in Larzelere, 2000) and it has been found that using CP as a back-up to other forms of punishment tends to be very effective (Gershoff, 2002).
Suggested Uses
Larzelere (2000) concluded that spankings have a time, a place, and a technique that will determine whether the effects will hurt or help the child. He notes that the point at which spankings become detrimental has not been defined as of yet, however, he offers a set of guidelines found to cause predominantly beneficial results.
Not Overly Severe
Two swats to the buttocks with an open hand
Under control
With children ages 2 to 6
Used with reasoning
Used privately
Motivated by concern for child
Used after a single warning
Used flexibly with other punishments
If a punishment is not working, rather than increasing the intensity of it, the parent should change tactics
These guidelines are quoted in Baumrind (2001), and similar guidelines are mentioned on the website of the Institute for the Study of Antisocial Behavior in Youth (IAY). The site quotes an article from Psychological Inquiry. This article stresses the following three situations:
Child-Parent Relationship
When the child perceives the parent as uncaring or distant, it is more likely that the child will suffer negative consequences. Oppositely, when the child sees the parent as warm or caring, detriments from CP can be minimal.
Cultural Context
CP is looked more favorably upon by certain groups including African Americans or conservative Protestants. Children of parents belonging to these groups are likely to view CP as normative and therefore experience few negative affects as a result of its use.
Gender of Parent and Child
If the parent punishing the child is of the same gender, negative affects may appear due to the appearance of the same-gendered parent as a role-model for the child.
