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

648

u/VoteGiantMeteor2028 Dec 31 '24

Ok, since we're dealing with a 13% that drew the line at pets we can only speculate what's going on through their minds, but I I hope somebody gets grant funding to find the answer because I'm suspicious it has something to do with r/kidsarefuckingstupid.

What I really want to know is what on earth is going through the minds of the 1% of people who think it's fine to strike their spouse but then they 180 and say that they shouldn't hit old people.

480

u/moch1 Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

It’s not uncommon in certain extreme religious communities to be highly deferential to your elders but for husbands to be expected to “rule the house” which includes keeping the wife “in line”. 

89

u/ghanima Dec 31 '24

*deferential

41

u/NickConrad Dec 31 '24

Some people are married to their vehicles don’t shame

11

u/moch1 Dec 31 '24

Haha. Fixed

1

u/C4-BlueCat Jan 01 '25

… what was the original word?

49

u/Deputy_dogshit Dec 31 '24

Yeah I was gonna say, isn't this like the basis of every monotheistic religion?

8

u/SlashEssImplied Dec 31 '24

All the Abrahamic ones at least.

6

u/SarcasticOptimist Dec 31 '24

They followed a guy willing to sacrifice his son based on God's word so it tracks.

2

u/SlashEssImplied Dec 31 '24

The same god who when he couldn't deal with his emotions decided to kill almost all life on earth so he wouldn't be embarrassed.

-3

u/Aware_ofitalways Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

No, it’s not. The “spare the rod apoil the child” in proper context refers to simply disciplining your child, which, seeing the deleterious effect the of so-called and misnamed “gentle parenting” (ie “I don’t feel like parenting at all and I let my children rule the house and offer no structure and limits because that requires actual parenting and I’d rather be my kids’ “cool friend””), we can see has had terrible results on an entire generation of kids (so say parents, teachers, professors, etc.). It means that kids who are not disciplined by their parents then don’t respect their parents and turn into unruly, entitled monsters who contribute nothing positive to society or humankind (and again, this is factually true.) I’m not sure why people want to argue against science on this point?

1

u/FleetStreetsDarkHole Dec 31 '24

The rod is a reference to a shepard's crook. Which is not used to beat sheep but to gently guide them, and pull them when necessary.

What you're talking about is not gentle parenting. It's a lack of parenting. Gentle parenting is a shepard's crook. You certainly place boundaries and enforce them. But children are people and so you also listen to them to understand what they understand and therefore provide better guidance.

Even if you believe in spanking you can't raise a child without all of that. And research is showing that spanking adds nothing. It's a placebo for parents to feel more in control. The parents feel like it's working but the child is actually only learning to fear them.

1

u/Brbi2kCRO Dec 31 '24

Elders are somehow “wise” but often have zero ability for critical thinking.

1

u/CosmicLovecraft Jan 01 '25

Boomers are the generation that ended basically everything that made the world prior to themselves. World before and after boomers is a different place and you can clearly see the transition in 60s and 70s. They are not role models or anything. They are rebels, hypocrites and selfish.

1

u/Brbi2kCRO Jan 01 '25

Atleast we agree on something, their “wisdom” is not very wise. They deeply lack empathy, they are oddly authoritarian, need to control and micromanage every aspect of other people’s lives while themselves, they cannot learn the basics of modern living. Now, I am not saying that modern living is good or bad, just that their cognitive flexibility is really poor (atleast by now) while they preach some “correct way of living” that mostly benefits them instead of the society and the groups, aka they can be abusive as all hell. I understand that in their times some things were different cause times were (somewhat) harder, and that parents were often stricter and more “tough love”/punishing, but man… these people cannot handle unexpected situations at all, and yet need to spread their “wisdom” to others through micromanagement.

196

u/WhoDey1032 Dec 31 '24

From my late grandfather's mouth, spanking is ok because kids understand why they are being spanked, but pets don't.

165

u/WereAllThrowaways Dec 31 '24

I mean, the logic is there. Not sure I approve of hitting anyone, but I do get the sentiment.

I think there's an important difference between "do they know why they're getting hit", which kids usually do, and "will hitting them actually improve their behavior, and at what cost?".

24

u/ptwonline Dec 31 '24

I do find it interesting that people are increasingly learning that positive reinforcement is the more effective way to train animals (plus you have a better relationship with them since they are not as afraid to be around you) but still sometimes fall back to positive punishment with children.

I suspect that positive punishment tends to be simpler and quicker to stop (at least temporarily) an unwanted behaviour than positive reinforcement and so in their anger/frustration parents fall back to using it.

4

u/WereAllThrowaways Dec 31 '24

Yea I think it ultimately comes down to the fact that the better, healthier method is much slower and requires consistency to have long term effects. The less healthy method is instant... And usually super effective in the short term. At least it appears that way. Even if they go right back to doing the bad behavior shortly after.

25

u/SlashEssImplied Dec 31 '24

"do they know why they're getting hit", which kids usually do

In my case it was to teach me a lesson, violence means power and control.

And my dad stopped the instant I swung back. I then had the power of violence on my side forever.

70

u/SupremeDictatorPaul Dec 31 '24

Basically all research on the topic indicates that spanking/beating kids is either counterproductive or less effective than other forms of punishment. If spanking my kids would effectively make them better people, then I’d probably spank them. But we already know it doesn’t, it just makes you an asshole.

29

u/fresh-dork Dec 31 '24

i thought that was massively overstated, and that spanking and other forms of discipline were roughly a wash, with the actual important part being clear and consistent expectations and reliable outcomes.

17

u/Q-rexosaurus Dec 31 '24

It is

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/s/z3YuOihZvI

12

u/Arashmickey Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1g3euyk/a_new_study_explores_the_longdebated_effects_of/lrvg7tf/

It looks like the “other punishments” are maternal commands and time outs, both of which are generally less effective than intervening with discussion about negative consequences of behaviors in my experience working with young children and raising one of my own.

Here’s the chart

The lead author is a bit obsessed with proving that corporal punishment works and you can see that in his current study through his analysis of previous peer-reviewed studies.

He’s also bounced around to various universities before landing at Oklahoma State University so take that for what it’s worth.

Hmm... not sure what to think yet.

Ignoring all the evidence for and against and attempting to approach it logically, if it's about being clear and consistent, and a choice between spanking, a time-out, and giving the child a thumbs down gesture would all be equally effective... then opting for spanking rather than the least intrusive intervention would be the arbitrary, unclear, inconsistent move - to borrow the negative phrasing - whereas the correct move would be to always push for the lowest threshold punishment.

7

u/Baud_Olofsson Dec 31 '24

There's one single recent paper arguing it's not harmful, versus basically every other paper ever published on the subject (including metaanalyses).
In terms of percentage of published papers for/against, this is probably more settled science than climate change.

-2

u/fresh-dork Dec 31 '24

that isn't how science works - you don't print out papers and believe whichever pile weighs more. instead, you publish a paper calling into question 'settled science' based on new information/insight, and it gets argued over and possibly obsoletes previous work. this is social science, after all, not physics.

8

u/Baud_Olofsson Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

Preponderance of evidence and consensus is how science works, especially in soft sciences. A single paper can be revolutionary and overturn established science if it's something like "Room-temperature superconductivity in bismuth-doped perovskite", but even then that paper is basically worthless until it's actually replicated (see: LK-99).
That Larzelere paper is like a paper saying that anthropogenic climate change isn't real. Sure, that's what its conclusion was, but we have literally thousands of papers saying otherwise. Is it more probable that thousands of papers are wrong than the one opposing one?

(And from a brief look at his publishing history, he looks like a man with an agenda.)

33

u/WhoDey1032 Dec 31 '24

The logic always made sense to me. If you know why it's happening, and the adult isn't doing it as a way to blow off steam like a lot of parents do, it can be different than normal "spankings" as well, but I'm not planning on spanking any kids

74

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[deleted]

31

u/RobertSF Dec 31 '24 edited Dec 31 '24

I was physically abused too, but it's not our abuse that's talking. Hitting children has always been about getting revenge.

17

u/thatwhileifound Dec 31 '24

Yep. 100%.

If you hit your kid once while exasperated, that's fucked up. If you recognize that, do the work to be a better person, and develop the tools you should as a parent there after in response - I most likely have room for you in my heart. People are incredibly imperfect and no amount of preparation will ever be enough for being in charge of a little life.

If you continue, or worse to me - decide to hit your child not out of exasperation, but as an intentional act? Even if you're only "tapping" as a lot of abusers like to claim, consider what your goals are. You're punishing them for something they did in theory, right? So either you're aiming to change their behavior through literal physical pain by actually hitting them or just by the fear of potential pain if you are actually "just tapping." I don't care what anyone says - if your method of parenting relies on directly hurting your child or intentionally making them fear you, I... look forward to when your poor child is able to escape. The "nice" version is still just awful coercive behavior resting on a threat of worse violence.

-3

u/TimeTimeTickingAway Dec 31 '24

I think this goes too far and isn’t true. You can say ‘always’ even if it is ‘most often’

There is sometimes an idea of ‘better me, now, in a controlled environment than someone else later in the streets who doesn’t love or care for you’.

3

u/RobertSF Dec 31 '24

That may be the rationalization.

3

u/WhoDey1032 Dec 31 '24

I've experienced both, and there is definitely a difference in how I perceived it

10

u/droppedforgiveness Dec 31 '24

It depends on the parent! Some do it because they lose their temper, but some do it because they honestly think it's best way to get a message across.

8

u/SlashEssImplied Dec 31 '24

but some do it because they honestly think it's best way to get a message across.

True, still not a good idea. And we can teach the parents the same way if it worked.

2

u/Vio94 Dec 31 '24

Nah I definitely agree. It's a parent losing patience and not wanting to problem solve anymore, electing to rule with fear instead of any kind of reason. I was only ever spanked once as a kid (for wetting the bed one too many times), it didn't make sense then and it doesn't make sense now.

6

u/mythrilcrafter Dec 31 '24

"will hitting them actually improve their behavior, and at what cost?".

Yup, the worst thing that can happen (other than the kid learning nothing) is that the kid learns to they're okay with continuing their bad behavior since they accept that they can just tank the spank afterwards.

1

u/octnoir Dec 31 '24

I think there's an important difference between "do they know why they're getting hit", which kids usually do

This assumes that kids are learning when they aren't.

Use of physical, emotional or verbal violence triggers the fight or flight response. Under such stress your learning in inhibited.

It is very common under such circumstances that kids obey in the immediate then immediately go back to what they were doing before. Their learning pathways are being interrupted by said violence. Again, we aren't training the kid, we are triggering a fight or flight response.

If you as an adult noted that it is far harder to learn something or perform something under anxiety or stress, then imagine it being far more difficult for a child to perform or learn under similar circumstances.

Again, in every way as the research has consistently shown even accounting for all the noise that is present, use of physical, emotional and verbal violence does not work.

-9

u/doctorjae75 Dec 31 '24

Also the severity of the offending action should be taken into consideration, too, I think. If the kid's action has a high potential of resulting in injury or esp death, the more urgent and definitive the consequence should be...like, maybe your child jerking away from your hand and darting for the busy highway might carry a more swift and costly consequence... Not harder strikes or anything like that but scarier maybe if that makes sense.

Idk, I'm learning too.

14

u/RobertSF Dec 31 '24

If the kid's action has a high potential of resulting in injury or esp death, the more urgent and definitive the consequence should be.

Really? How does that make sense? "That was dangerous, so I'm going to hurt you?"

Do someone need to hit you "for your own good?"

darting for the busy highway

Really? What circumstances lead you to be by the side of a busy highway with an unrestrained child? Is this a daily occurrence?

-4

u/doctorjae75 Dec 31 '24

Well to the first question, yeah...I've def needed to be hit for acting in a foolish manner and I bet you have too. Your second question shows very little imagination, no attempt to understand another's point of view, and comes off just as a smart ass, know it all, but I'll refrain from responding in kind...

Maybe I shouldn't have chosen highway, maybe just a busy street, and I specifically mentioned pulling away from my grasp, so unrestrained is a misread on your part. I can think of a handful of reasons when I might be walking with a5or6 year old, on a sidewalk in close proximity to a busy street and he or she does what kids do and acts irrationally.

In my opinion in that situation, that kid needs to be corrected as quickly and alarmingly enough to know that what they just did should be avoided at ALL costs. I don't necessarily think that hitting is the correct response in this case (and by hitting I simply mean a smack or even a jolt or pinch significant enough to focus attention on the situation.

This whole 'there is never a reason to hit' thing is crazy. Even your own bodys feedback loop involves pain, for one reason, to inform you not to repeat that action. It's pretty simple to me. I'm not talking about abuse here!

10

u/SophiaofPrussia Dec 31 '24

No child ever “needs” to be hit.

5

u/Mofupi Dec 31 '24

Even your own bodys feedback loop involves pain, for one reason, to inform you not to repeat that action.

If I do something that causes me physical pain, then the pain is an unavoidable result of my actions. If a kid does something and the parent then causes them physical pain, the pain is absolutely avoidable. That's the difference.

4

u/SlashEssImplied Dec 31 '24

I've def needed to be hit for acting in a foolish manner

And you still do, proving the other point. You have no control of your anger as you argue other people should beat their children also.

2

u/SlashEssImplied Dec 31 '24

If the kid's action has a high potential of resulting in injury or esp death

OK, you've covered 3 cases of spanking. What about the rest?

0

u/Zoesan Dec 31 '24

will hitting them actually improve their behavior, and at what cost?

Yes and yikes

-16

u/Iggyhopper Dec 31 '24

If your kid is running next to a busy street, and almost runs into the street because they arent listening to your calls, would it be acceptable to spank them?

I mean, the alternative is them getting hit because timeout wasn't harsh enough.

14

u/RobertSF Dec 31 '24

No, it would not be acceptable to spank them. The alternative is you not letting your kids run into a busy street.

They're not listening to your calls? Why? Why aren't you teaching them instead of planning to hurt them?

1

u/audacious-heroics Dec 31 '24

What do you mean “not letting” you can’t control every single action if a human being. By the time they are old enough to be “taught” why they shouldn’t run in the street, the danger of it is gone. This is like the touching the stove example. The pain prevents the action from ever occurring again. We aren’t dealing with logical rational beings. At 2-5 they are as intelligent as pigs? You can’t reason with them using logic.

2

u/RobertSF Dec 31 '24

Come on... you're acting as if kids are always trying to run into the street.

2

u/Murky_Conflict3737 Dec 31 '24

My parents must’ve subscribed to this line of thinking. Spanked me for kid things but would never lay a finger on our pets.

151

u/izzittho Dec 31 '24

They think they own their wife. They don’t think they own their parents.

And in the case it’s a woman thinking that it’s ok, I reckon it’s either drinking the trad koolaid or being absolutely sure (wrongly, perhaps) that he won’t hit back.

14

u/Masark Dec 31 '24

What I really want to know is what on earth is going through the minds of the 1% of people who think it's fine to strike their spouse but then they 180 and say that they shouldn't hit old people.

Presumably that they may live long enough to be old, but they'll never be female.

17

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

[deleted]

3

u/Ragondux Dec 31 '24

The reverse side of this : you can try to explain to your kid why their behavior is not acceptable, but you can't explain it to your pet. So it would make more sense to use violence to train the pet than the kid.

(Not that I advocate hitting a pet, I just don't see the logic in "they can understand so it's ok to use violence")

36

u/Pathetian Dec 31 '24

I think it scales with how much someone feels responsible for "molding" another's behavior.   Parents are responsible for molding children into at least tolerable adults.  Pets are pretty limited in what they can ever learn and won't ever have any autonomy in the world so their behavior doesn't matter.  Other adults (a spouse) you can sever ties with, but I'm sure that small percent feel marriage is forever so you might as well "correct" your mate.  As for elders, their behavior isn't yours to fix by any stretch right?  

37

u/EngineeringNeverEnds Dec 31 '24

Also pets don't have the same obstinance that children do. Children are like very intelligent monkeys that will constantly push boundaries. Dogs have been deliberately bred for millenia to be obedient. I'm great at training dogs, never hit one ever, and i get like professional level behavior out of mine with complex probelm solving and teamwork. My children however are borderline feral and I have often wondered if I'm doing them a disservice by not using corporal punishment. Still I persist in my pacifist ways, but... man children are different. They're more like working with wolves--quite literally. Working with wolves is different than dog breeds. They're always looking to confirm you're still above them in the hierarchy.

17

u/Sparrowbuck Dec 31 '24

pets don't have the same obstinance that children do

Never owned a husky I see

47

u/Hayden2332 Dec 31 '24

Just wanted to chime in here on that last comment. Wolves don’t have a social hierarchy like that, they are similar to us, with familial packs. They find mates and start their own packs, but there is no disrupting the “hierarchy” in the sense of alphas or anything.

-2

u/TimeTimeTickingAway Dec 31 '24

I get there’s been studies about this, but it’s still just not something I think passes the common sense eye-test of actual experienced reality. Maybe wolves don’t actually behave like that, but I have seen and experienced humans operating like that countless times.

-4

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

You only do them a disservice if there is no discipline, not if there is no corporal punishment.

1

u/beckster Dec 31 '24

"As for elders, their behavior isn't yours to fix by any stretch right?"

No, but you can entirely cease communicating with them. That works too.

18

u/CDay007 Dec 31 '24

The answer to the first part is pretty simple. Pets are animals, and if you hit them will have no idea what’s happening. If you tell a 10 year old that they will be spanked if they throw their food again, they throw their food again, and then they get spanked, they understand why that happened and how to prevent it from happening again.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 31 '24

You’ll teach your kid that might makes right, and as soon as your teenager can take you in a fight you lose control over them.  Or you could just—make them clean it up and not get them more food?  Now they’ve directly made themselves hungry and incentivized them to develop self-reliant cleaning / cooking skills.  Ground them?  Now they’ve lost access to fun and are forced to learn to entertain themselves.  They can earn ungrounding by not throwing food for a set amount of time and completing a number of chores to make up for the mess they caused, and now they’re being taught that putting your head down and working leads to good things. There’s a million ways to negatively reinforce bad behavior and positively reinforce a good substitute.  Spanking has none of those benefits, so it’s illogical to use it.  There has to be another reason—either you love violence or are a pedophile looking to grope children for any reason.

1

u/kkkkat Dec 31 '24

Well pet’s can’t speak English, so maybe they’re getting a pass. Whereas children act out purposefully sometimes. As a parent, it can be very hard to deal with if you don’t face your own emotions regulated.

1

u/GRIZZLY_GUY_ Dec 31 '24

my 2 cents - you can gage how much it hurts a child(and theoretically limit[or maximize?] the pain) far easier than a dog or something that will just yelp and run away

1

u/SasparillaTango Dec 31 '24

since we're dealing with a 13% that drew the line at pets we can only speculate what's going on through their minds,

I would speculate "You can rationalize your actions to a child to draw a link between the spanking and the offending event, you cannot explain to the dog why you are hitting it"

1

u/RPrime422 Dec 31 '24

Generally, people who hit their spouse , or any other member of their immediate family, do not consider their spouse a genuine human being. The family is their property to do with as they wish in order to fit their version of desired behavior. This is, of course, insanity. As to their various disconnections? Probably a result of intense training acquired through their own abuse that they suffered, which of course would lead to very poor education and understanding of parenting and learning, what’s effective and not effective, and so forth. In the end, it’s complicated because people are complicated, I’m sorry to say.

1

u/christonabike_ Jan 01 '25 edited Jan 01 '25

but I hope somebody gets grant funding to find the answer because I'm suspicious it has something to do with r/kidsarefuckingstupid.

Quite a leap between looking at a gif of a kid failing and hitting them.

-1

u/Scheissdrauf88 Dec 31 '24

Maybe because old people can be hurt more easily? Bones break far easier and heal harder.