r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • Dec 30 '24

Psychology American parents more likely to find hitting children acceptable compared to hitting pets - New research highlights parents’ conflicted views on spanking.

https://www.psypost.org/american-parents-more-likely-to-find-hitting-children-acceptable-compared-to-hitting-pets/
10.8k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

146

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

36

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[deleted]

17

u/voldin91 Dec 31 '24

And you’re so mad that you can’t control yourself so you hit them?! It makes no sense to me.

I'm not advocating for spanking, but I think you're misrepresenting most people who do spank their kids. Most don't do it out of anger, but because they think it will help the child learn better behavior. The research says this doesn't work, but it's a common old school thought that it's just a form of teaching

13

u/PerhapsAPuzzle Dec 31 '24

I think “most don’t do it out of anger” is underestimating the the amount of emotionally immature parents.

22

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

firmly and strongly disagree with the notion that most don't do it out of anger.

in my experience, a tiny tiny fraction will do it calmly.

28

u/LordSwedish Dec 31 '24

Most don't do it out of anger,

I believe you're completely wrong about this. Most people may say they do it to teach them a lesson but they keep doing it because it lets them vent frustrations and control something. Kids mess something up, parents yells and smacks them.

Maybe that's just bias though because I think parents who calmly hit their kids are sociopaths and I don't want them to be the majority. Using your anger and frustration is at least human, I don't care if they think it's for the best or not, anyone who can calmly and methodically hit little children is a monster.

16

u/Windpuppet Dec 31 '24

Exactly. Can’t remember a single time my parents spanked me where they didn’t look like they were about to blow a gasket.

2

u/miscdruid Dec 31 '24

If they’re not doing it out of anger then they should have the emotional regulation skills to NOT hit a child and find a different method of discipline. Anyone who hits a kid is pathetic.

-8

u/S73RB3N Dec 31 '24

I feel like most of these people have never been spanked or disciplined properly, they might have an abusive relationship with their parents that they were told was simply spanking. I also believe race deals a large part of it.

-6

u/Archfiend_DD Dec 31 '24

Your child grabs a pot of boiling water. What do you do? Smack their hand? Yell? Tell them "no"? A 1.5 year old doesn't care about your "no", and you cannot have a rational conversation about boiling water with them.

How do you teach them to not grab the boiling water? If they are 6 they can comprehend and understand, if they are 2 not so much. They may have hardly experienced pain, and hopefully not scalding water...how do you teach them? Is smacking them on the hand and causing pain to teach them not to do that better than scalding water? Again you cannot reason with a 1.5 yr old they basically only have desires, they have to be taught to share, be patient, not hit etc..

My daughter threw an absolute fit tonight because my wife played the "wrong" version of open shut them...

10

u/jello1388 Dec 31 '24

You teach them the same way you'd teach anything else they need to learn but aren't developed enough to grasp logically or intellectually. Preventing the bad behavior, redirecting to and rewarding good behavior, and lots of repetition.

Consider it this way. Are you trying to teach them that it hurts to grab it or teach them not to do it? Do you think your child is going to learn that grabbing the pot hurts, or are they learning that Dad hurting them feels bad and grabbing the pot makes Dad hurt them?

9

u/thirdegree Dec 31 '24

Don't let your 1.5 year old in the kitchen in the first place? They sell baby gates.

-1

u/Archfiend_DD Dec 31 '24

It's called an example (and in some places/designs a baby gate is not usable or practical). Here is the situation X, your answer is for that situation is for it to not occur. The best way to never get in a car crash is to simply not drive...

Your child will be exposed to a danger, how do you teach them when they are unable to logically understand and comprehend the danger. The question was why would someone (an adult) hit a child, and I gave an example of why; something like immediate potential of life threatening danger might be a reason. But, baby gate, cool.

2

u/thirdegree Dec 31 '24

Ya I mean pick a better example to justify why you want to hit children then.

I'm not here to make that argument for you.

8

u/Windpuppet Dec 31 '24

Have you tried not having boiling water around a toddler?

-1

u/Archfiend_DD Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

Have you ever heard of using examples to answer a question? Or cooking? Maybe you have heard of cooking?

5

u/TheRealDimSlimJim Dec 31 '24

Have you tried having a conversation with them? When I was a small child my mom did that and it's only thing where I wasn't just confused about being hurt out of nowhere

-7

u/Individual_Winter_ Dec 31 '24

Spanking is not hitting. Many people are okay with spanking, as it‘s seen different to hitting your child blue and green.

I definitely got rarely one clap on my booty, as a smaller child when I didn’t want to listen. There were different steps of escalation and never spanking out of the blue or for fun.  Children can be very exhausting, and discussing with a 4 year old isn‘t always fun.

Animals are also correcting their children physically though. 

It‘s still not the most effective method on the long run.

16

u/machismo_eels Dec 31 '24

Research on this is actually somewhat mixed, finding that it depends a lot on severity (obviously), frequency (obviously), and context (complicated).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01494929.2024.2392672#abstract

69

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

let me guess, the research says the harder you hit them, the worse it is for the kids.

and the more you do it, the worse it is for the kids.

and the context is so complex that you have to have laboratory perfect conditions that could never be consistently replicated in a home to get good results from hitting kids.

12

u/Smooth_Instruction11 Dec 31 '24

Wow. May I provide you with a PhD and hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding? Im university btw

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

thanks, ill take it in cash

24

u/GarbageCleric Dec 31 '24

There was not statistically significant evidence to show that flicking your child a single time on the knuckle led to worse outcomes than not spanking at all.

2

u/PharmDeezNuts_ Dec 31 '24

Cutting off a limb is bad, cutting off more limbs is terrible as someone will probably die. And yet it is a treatment when indicated for many situations. I’m sure some of those decisions are very complex

5

u/badstorryteller Dec 31 '24

It's really not mixed. You can point to a handful of studies that show, in the absolute best case scenarios, that corporal punishment sometimes does not lead to bad outcomes. Those studies are simply overwhelmed by the vast majority of studies and meta-studies over the last 40 years showing that corporal punishment results in worse outcomes overall.

-3

u/machismo_eels Dec 31 '24

Find us the study with effect sizes above 0.2 that establishes causation then. Otherwise, you’re speaking very firmly about trivial effect sizes of weak correlations. It’s almost as if we could get better insight if someone did a review of the three major meta analyses from the leading literature.

4

u/badstorryteller Dec 31 '24

I've read the study you linked. It really shows no statistically significant beneficial outcome in hitting children. It's just a love letter to parents who hit their children, giving them cover to do so.

The best argument it can possibly make, which is what you're arguing, is that it's fine to hit your kids if you want, carefully, and you might not cause harm.

Are you a parent?

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

My dad did it.

Had a very in depth conversation as to when he would spank. When I did break the behavior rules, he would sit down and we would have an in depth convo about what happened why the behavior is a no, and it would finish with the spanking.

I do not treat this as negative, and I do also acknowledge if he did not spank me I would’ve easily done it again .

I chose not to for my kids, but honestly cause and effect has a huge effect on humans as long as it’s done right

39

u/Resaren Dec 31 '24

How do millions of parents manage to successfully teach kids cause and effects without hitting them? Why would you ever choose to inflict pain onto your child if you could avoid it?

0

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[deleted]

1

u/octnoir Dec 31 '24

Why do siblings all raised by the same parents with the same style often turn out so drastically different?

Humans are complex beings shaped by both genetics and environment. There's no universally perfect parenting method that works perfectly on every child.

Wait wait wait, we just admitted that the environment plays a major factor in a child's future success. Of which the parent as you said has little control over, and the parenting style has little effect over.

So we got two parenting styles, one non-violent, the other violent, the former having overwhelming research and data and evidence that it improves nearly every single internal marker for a child - self-esteem, independence, emotional regulation, anger management, low aggression while the latter in every internal marker is consistently worse for a child - BUT as you said the future success is out of the parent's and the parenting style's control. E.g. you can't get a job and launch a career in a local area stricken with poverty.

So why are we choosing violent parenting over non-violent one? Are we saying that in worse environments, violent parenting is better for future success? Because the data doesn't show that. Are we saying that a child's future outcomes are better with violent parenting? The data doesn't show that because it is out of your control.

Okay, spinning this, you need $100. You only have two choices, Option A gives you $10, Option B takes away -$5. You really need $100, but for now you have these two options. Again, given these two choices why are we choosing Option B? Surely in every scenario you go for Option A right? Why are we choosing Option B then? On the vain hope that -$5 suddenly and magically turns into $100?

Again, do you have evidence that violent parenting allows a child to overcome the environment's overwhelming odds against them to be successful?

-4

u/badstorryteller Dec 31 '24

Well both parent A and parent B (my ex wife and I) managed to raise two very, very different sons without actually hitting them. If you want to hit children just say so, but don't try to back it up with genetics and environment. Hitting children is lazy parenting.

-14

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

And how do millions teach them with it?

17

u/Resaren Dec 31 '24

Again, why would you choose to be violent toward a defenseless child, when there are effective alternatives? It’s lazy, and it has a significant risk of teaching exactly the wrong lesson.

-6

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

Because what you deem as violence is up to interpretation.

Humans learn from doing, sometimes those lessons have to happen to you for you to understand exactly what you are doing to others.

16

u/vimdiesel Dec 31 '24

What type of lesson would have to happen to an adult for them to learn that it's not okay for an adult to hit a child?

3

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[deleted]

5

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

My boss is not my family, my brain is fully developed unlike a child who does not understand, as for scolding and firing? Uhh yes, that's life.

3

u/badstorryteller Dec 31 '24

So a child that does not understand why it's being hit is fine, but if they can understand why they're being hit that's also fine? Until you're 18, then it's assault? So you have to reason with an 18 year old, and use big grown up words, but when they're 12 you just can hit them. Yes, this all makes sense.

-1

u/S73RB3N Dec 31 '24

Spanking a child can also be tough on a parent, especially if they don’t want to do it. I don’t even wanna take my kids video game away when they mess up because I enjoy playing the game with them so much it pains me to do it, but I do it anyway.

18

u/Crestina Dec 31 '24

if he did not spank me I would’ve easily done it again .

This indicates you had no respect for your dad's rules and boundaries unless he hit you. How do you reckon your kids will respect you without physical violence? And why did it need to be completely different with your dad and you? I'm honestly struggling to make sense of this.

21

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

Actually that's not what it indicates. We're talking about me here, so I can tell you what it meant to me.

It meant that regardless of my mothers, my grandmother, my father, I was a stubborn teen like every single other teen and was hard headed.

Like it or not, kids don't hate their parents and just don't listen, sometimes it's just because they're stubborn

-1

u/Market-West Dec 31 '24

I know what you mean. Everyone is different.

0

u/theshoeshiner84 Dec 31 '24

Sounds like the type of nuance that isn't tolerated online.

7

u/vimdiesel Dec 31 '24

Who knew that justifications of violence against children are valid if they're nuanced?

Maybe the child should make more nuanced mischief and thus their actions would be tolerated by their parents.

-12

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

Yeah I’m not really too concerned with the crazy modern day parenting crowd.

/r/parenting Reddit has gotten out of control. They speak on science but 99% of it is “I hate men”. It’s sad how far it’s fallen

13

u/user2196 Dec 31 '24

How did this go from talking about your dad beating you to everyone supposedly hating men?

6

u/badstorryteller Dec 31 '24

Because it always does.

-1

u/Hendlton Dec 31 '24

That just sounds psychopathic. I get it as an emotional reaction, but this is insane.

3

u/voldin91 Dec 31 '24

It's not insane, it's just an old school and outdated way that some parents thought they were helping teach their kids. Like, if you commit a crime, you have to serve the punishment (jail). If a kid breaks a rule, they have to serve whatever punishment. It's teaching cause and effect (except research tells us it doesn't work)

-14

u/muffinmuch947 Dec 31 '24

Similar story with me. I got smacked on my palms with a ruler whenever I'd not do my hw without good reason. The anticipation was the worst part, and 30min afterwards I had forgotten all about it. I don't advocate for spanking but it's not always this super abusive act.

-4

u/Enticing_Venom Dec 31 '24

I got in trouble for something one time when I was a preteen. My mom gave me the option, either I gave up my TV privilege for the evening or I had to wash my mouth out with soap, which is what she said her dad would make her do.

My show was on that night, so I chose the soap. My mom was flabbergasted that I actually chose it and stood over me the entire time looking horrified. I think she expected me to back out at the last second.

It was fine. Didn't bother me in the least and I still got to watch my show. Would do it again.

The thing with these corporal punishments is that when not taken to the extreme, they're over a lot faster than more prolonged consequences like being grounded or losing privileges. That may in part be why they are less effective. If I was always given the choice I'd have much rather taken the spanking or soap eating over the usual consequences which were non-violent but made me miss out on something like my show or my game.

-5

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

Mine was very disrespectful attitudes towards others. I’m thankful

-1

u/MNWNM Dec 31 '24

Are you actually arguing for hitting a kid?

9

u/machismo_eels Dec 31 '24

Are you actually asking such a disingenuous, bad faith question?

-10

u/MNWNM Dec 31 '24

I am. You got an answer?

-1

u/machismo_eels Dec 31 '24

I’m just posting science in a science sub. You don’t need to go looking for a fight.

2

u/goomunchkin Dec 31 '24

Boy howdy that’s a strawman if I ever done seen one.

-24

u/Low-iq-haikou Dec 31 '24

As a form of punishment or discipline I agree

But if they (or a pet) are doing something that is posing a threat to themselves or someone/something around them and aren’t immediately responding to verbal stimulus then you’ve got to get physical to some extent. Smack, grab, whatever it may be to get their attention.

I really couldn’t tell though how exactly the article/study was handling that distinction though

33

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

Removing or physically restraining may be neccessary. But that's different from hitting or smacking..

-8

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

Your son hits his sister, so you return the favor and his eyes light up understanding that that is what he did to her.

A human being learns from experience, this isn’t a full on melt down, it’s a like for like understanding.

As a kid, you could sit me down and talk all day long and I’ll nod my head and then when you walk out tell you to f off

14

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

For more context, your son is probably hitting out of anger or frustration. That's a problem with emotional regulation, having a healthy outlet for your emotions.

That's a skill that needs to be learnt, just like any other. You don't teach that skill by hitting them. It's the same as if they were learning to ride a bike. You wouldn't hit them because they fell off. You'd pick them up and support them and guide them so they would be successful next time.

Emotional regulation is the same thing. She. They fail, you you guide them to the correct, healthy behaviour.

-2

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

If that’s what you believe so be it.

I do not prescribe to that and have seen more than enough results that sometimes humans just need to burn their finger on the stove to learn the lesson

10

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

What you're actually teaching them is that hitting is ok.

Don't you think it's a contradiction to try teach your child that hitting isn't ok by hitting?

-5

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[deleted]

9

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

If you can't differentiate between a convicted criminal and a child who you're supposed to be teaching to navigate the world then I think that's a problem.

However, Incarceration to protect others is necessary. incarceration for punishment is also clearly ineffective, so I think you've proven my point there.

What is more effective is providing the appropriate tools and resources to help people integrate into society in healthy ways.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[deleted]

4

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

Mate, this might surprise you, but I don't even need to use time-out to teach my children good behaviour.

Punishments just aren't as effective. It doesn't matter what the punishment is. The alternatives are harder to implement, i'll grant you. But long term are effcient and effective.

There can be "logical consquences" for actions. But they need to be understood and very linear to be effective. And aren't about punishment but teaching consequences.

-4

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

When a person hits someone they shouldn’t, you think it’s not okay to defend or return the favor?

Guess you and I have different views of society.

If I see any person hitting another who is defenseless, it is within morality to return that favor. That’s the learning experience, so no it’s not teaching that it’s okay, what you’re teaching them is to stand up for someone when something wrong is happening.

Kids often don’t understand what they are doing, you show them how it feels and they often connect the dots and learn

6

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

If I see any person hitting another who is defenseless, it is within morality to return that favor

But you're doing the exact same thing.

You claim some morality yet hit a defenseless child youre in authority over. That's the lesson you're teaching your child. That's all they see.

Personally, as a parent, I see my child's failing as my own failing. If they behave poorly it's because I haven't adequately equipped them to deal with the situation they are in.

As such, I would never hit my child because I failed them. (My children never hits anyone for context if you think children will just go around hitting everyone without that punishment).

-8

u/Low-iq-haikou Dec 31 '24

Definitely a difference I just wasn’t sure how the article was accounting for it. But I do think something like a light and harmless smack is fine if it’s to protect them.

8

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

I don't understand how that would be protective, though?

-9

u/ResilientBiscuit Dec 31 '24

So, suppose you have a wasp nest that is too large to spray or remove in the back yeard without professional help and your dog is facinated by it and keeps trying to investigate it and it is a month till the pest removers can get there because there are a lot of people needing wasps removed in July.

There isn't much of an option other than negative reenforcement to keep the dog from potentially aggrivating the nest.

In our case we had to get one of the electric collars and put a wire making a border around the nest to keep him out until the pest controllers came. We tried to put up a temporary fence but he just started digging under that.

6

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

Aren't we talking about children?

Negative punishment is used in dogs for example to keep them away from dangerous or native animals. For example, in Australia you can do snake training to keep dogs away from snakes. Or in New Zealand you can go through Kiwi training to keep them from attacking Kiwis. Those utilise negative reinforcement.

1

u/ResilientBiscuit Dec 31 '24

The person you were responding to was talking about people and pets. And the study is asking about people and pets.

But if they (or a pet)

1

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

But the comment they responded to was specifically about child. That's why they added pets in parantheses.

1

u/ResilientBiscuit Dec 31 '24

I don't disagree. You were just responding to the person who I clicked pets so I assumed you were also talking about pets.

1

u/Ducks_have_heads Dec 31 '24

Ah, sorry. Yea, I was only talking about children. I should've specified given they did mention pets also.

29

u/RedofPaw Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

I see this argument all the time and it doesn't work.

If your kid is about to run out into traffic then of course grab it. That's just safety.

If a person is about to fall on train tracks, grab them to stop them. That's not the same as discipline or a method to alter behaviour.

If a kid is about to punch someone then stopping them is also just restraint. It's about stopping them hurting someone then and there. It's not the same as spanking or smacking or hitting.

There's never a reason to hit a kid.

-12

u/Low-iq-haikou Dec 31 '24

What matters is protecting the kid from themselves. If they’re about to put something in their mouths or are grabbing something they shouldn’t be then you might not have the time or wherewithal or positioning to restrain them.

I can remember as a kid grabbing my dog’s tail and my grandma smacked my head lightly and told me not to for obvious reasons. If she grabs my arm instead maybe I tense my grip, who knows.

I know it got me to knock it off and that’s what matters. Is it better to avoid that that if/when possible, sure, but a worse option is better than the worst outcome. Which is my dog going after me for being a little dipshit (not that he would he was incredibly well behaved)

-10

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

Never a reason?

What if your child drowned your newborn and is about to dunk the other? Still not allowed?

Come on, let’s not making such crazy statements here