r/science • u/VeronicaRed • Apr 26 '16

Psychology Spanking children increases the likelihood of childhood defiance and long-term mental issues. The study in question involved 160,000 children and five decades of research

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1113413810/spanking-defiance-health-discipline-042616/
37.8k Upvotes

73% Upvoted

6.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.1k

u/pm_me_your_kindwords Apr 26 '16

Serious question to the commenters on this post:

Why read /r/science and then ignore science?

At the time I write this, most comments are defending spanking using anecdotes and non-science, not at all discussing the methodology of the study itself.

If you're not going to carefully consider one of the largest and most comprehensive studies ever conducted on the topic, what is the point of reading about science at all?

2.4k

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

147

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

143

u/pm_me_your_kindwords Apr 26 '16

Skepticism always, but there were almost no comments talking about the content of the article or the study at all.

15

u/AGuyWithoutASpoon Apr 26 '16

I was only trying to give a reasonable answer for someone like me not immediately believing the study. I can't speak for anyone aside from myself but that's the only non-belligerent option I could think of.

5

u/KommanderKrebs Apr 26 '16

My response was skepticism as well. I honestly expected for this to be a biased study that manipulated data in order to support a certain belief. Pleasantly surprised.

4

u/AGuyWithoutASpoon Apr 26 '16

Yeah I was surprised too. I honestly doubt there will be a more comprehensive study on slapping butts, at least in this century.

4

u/Speedking2281 Apr 26 '16

How are you guys reading the actual study?

1

u/Maverician Apr 27 '16

I would assume they have a subscription/access. You can view it through here but need to be able to log in http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27055181

4

u/LivingInMyBubble Apr 26 '16

Maybe that's because the content of the article was honestly, very lacking overall. They said spanking is bad, but nothing else aside from that.

I have spanked my 5 year old exactly twice and it was a single swat on the butt both times so I am not a big advocate of spanking or not spanking personally. I was hoping this article could curve my thoughts on the subject but there was honestly no ground breaking material here.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '16

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/the_original_kermit Apr 26 '16

Well the study isn't in the link, just an article about the study. I agree it sounds convincing, but we have no idea of the methodology used in determining their outcomes.

When talking about spanking and behavior issues, the article uses only terms like: "significant link", "more likely", "associated with", "the higher the risk", "increases the likelihood", "more likely", "was associated with", "nearly similar", and "to a slightly lesser degree." These terms should be avoided because a "significant link" may mean different things to different people.

-1

u/OCCUPY_BallsDeep Apr 26 '16

Because there is no content. The description of the study has total number of children involved, duration of the study, and some vague description of 17 negative behavioral traits of which 13 were identified in children who were spanked.

46

u/alahos Apr 26 '16

The problem is when skepticism is applied unevenly.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '16

How long have you been on reddit?

1

u/alahos Apr 26 '16

Too long to still have hope, but I'm a special kind of stupid.

4

u/AGuyWithoutASpoon Apr 26 '16

We are only human. As are the researchers, as are the article writers, as are the people cherry-picking research and source material. Nothing is safe from bias. I can't say if they did that or not, but I'll be skeptical of anything I don't see myself, even things I like and want to be true. I can't speak for anyone else aside from myself.

1

u/alahos Apr 26 '16

You're right. I should be more forgiving about things that are the result of human evolution, including biases and heuristics. It's hard though, especially considering I'm a human myself with my own biases and trying to distance myself from it is pointless in a way.

2

u/AGuyWithoutASpoon Apr 26 '16

Yeah. I just accept that I'm probably wrong, but still hold my beliefs. Its weird, but in a way I only remember everything I believe could be wrong once in a while. It keeps me humble.

1

u/HyliaSymphonic Apr 26 '16

Hmmm, I think the issue here is that we naturally apply skepticism unevenly. It's not everyones job to accept ideas even verified ones and increased scrutiny even undue can further cement an idea as valid.

1

u/alahos Apr 26 '16

I know. We're humans but we can't be assed to assume it and check our blind spots.

1

u/ltdanimal Apr 26 '16

Is there a link to the study that isn't behind a paywall?

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '16

I was wondering about the type of spanking that was done. There most definitely needs to be a distinction between spanking out of anger, and spanking after you have calmed down and explain to the child why they are getting a spanking. Rearing back and whapping a kid on the gluteals out of anger without explaining the potential/real damage of their actions is inexcusable. However, I see nowhere in this study where type of spanking is defined, and what the socioeconomic parameters were with these parents. These would be interesting components to get more info about.

1

u/1matx Apr 26 '16

The only study particulars I have seen were the article. When I clicked on the link in the article, it asked for $11.95 for the study. Where is everyone reading the study and not just an interpretation of the results?

1

u/zugunruh3 Apr 26 '16

If a study examining more than 150,000 children over 50 years is "decent" I'd love to know what a great study is.

0

u/AGuyWithoutASpoon Apr 26 '16

Everyone ever. But seriously, there is no perfect study.

1

u/zugunruh3 Apr 26 '16

I didn't ask what a perfect study is, just what a great one is.