Stephen, I never should have used those quotation marks and knew I should get the page and exact quote from her book. But I can assure you her exact quote is not far what I paraphrased. I was shocked and dismayed BUT I do apologize for using quotes when not having the book and exact quote. I'll get back to TIPS about the actual quote asap.
Joan [email protected] > On 8 Feb 2009 at 19:10, Joan Warmbold wrote: > >> Judith Harris's carries this notion of >> children causing their parents to not parent well to the extreme. Catch >> this--she actually states something to the effect that 'if parents beat >> their children, is it not likely due to the fact that their children >> were >> more difficult and unlikeable than parents who do not beat their >> children?' > > Just as nature abhors a vacuum, I abhor the misrepresentation of the > views of a scholar, however unintentional. What Joan attributes to Judith > Harris is curious. Despite the disclaimer ("something to the effect > that"), what Joan repeats appears in quotation marks, suggesting it is > close to what Harris actually said. It isn't, and from what I know of > Harris's insightful and meticulous work, it couldn't possibly be. And > the context is missing. > > Joan doesn't provide a source for this alleged assertion of Harris, which > Joan may have heard second-hand, but I'm pretty sure it must be the > discussion around p. 27 of _The Nurture Assumption_. This is in a chapter > on interpreting scientific findings, an area where Harris excels. She > notes that many studies in child development find that children who are > treated well by their parents turn out well ("Generalization 2, p. 20). > She points out that socialization researchers (in fact, "nearly > everyone") believe that this demonstrates that good parenting causes > children to turn out well. > > This is no surprise to us on TIPS, as, we've complained about this > fallacy on numerous occasions. She explains the point to her readers this > way (but keep in mind that this is part of a detailed discussion which > I've severely edited): > > "The relationship between a parent and a child...is a two-way > street...When two people interact, what each one says or does is, in > part, a reaction to what the other has just said or done...Even young > babies make an active contribution to the parent-child relationship. By > the time they are two months old, most babies are looking their parents > in the eye and smiling at them..." > > "Some babies [with autism]...don't do this. Autistic babies don't look > their parents in the eye, don't smile at them, don't seem glad to see > them. It is difficult to feel enthusiastic about a baby who isn't > enthusiastic about you. It is difficult to interact with a child who > won't look at you" > > Then she says: "Generalization 2 said that children who are hugged are > more likely to be nice, children who are beaten are more likely to be > unpleasant. Turn that statement around and you get one that is equally > plausible: nice children are more likely to be hugged, unpleasant > children are more likely to be beaten. Do the hugs cause the children's > niceness, or is the children's niceness the reason why they are hugged, > or are both true? Do beatings make children unpleasant, or are parents > more likely to lose their tempers with unpleasant children, or are both > true? In the standard socialization study, there is no way to distinguish > these alternative explanations, no way to tell the causes from the > effects. Thus, Generalization 2 does not prove what it appears to prove." > > Note that her discussion: > > a) is hypothetical > b) is concerned with a methodological issue > c) takes no sides concerning which outcome is "likely" > d) is entirely reasonable and persuasive (ok, that's my opinion, but I'm > sticking with it). > > Now review what Joan says Harris said and compare it with the real > version. > > Stephen > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. > Professor of Psychology, Emeritus > Bishop's University e-mail: [email protected] > 2600 College St. > Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 > Canada > > Subscribe to discussion list (TIPS) for the teaching of > psychology at http://flightline.highline.edu/sfrantz/tips/ > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([email protected]) > > --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
