All of this discussion also needs to take account of an
operational definition of 'spank'--with both of my boys,
who sometimes failed to respond to time outs or talking
to, etc. because it was just their personality/temperament/nature
not to respond, life-endangering behaviors which were
persisted with (i.e., sticking objects in electrical outlets)
or simply behaviors that damaged property (i.e., persisting
in using black crayon to draw on walls) were eventually,
when all the other methods failed, handled in 1-shot
learning: one swift, good hand swat to the behind. I don't
care what all the research shows, for my boys it ALWAYS
worked--even though the 20-year old now tells me it never
hurt--I wasn't strong enough to hurt him--but there was
something about the shock value, since it happened seldom and
was a last resort--and was only used when they were much
too young to reason with (probably up to age 5/6 only).
So, now if we want to look at 'spanking', I think that counts.
At least my 20-year old, so far, has a 'good end' (I'd say
overall, even 'great end'). The 11-year old is also doing
exceptionally well overall, but still has a ways to go for
his final outcome I guess.
Since these are retrospective accounts, since the data are
CORRELATIONAL by definition--how do we draw the cause &
effect conclusions????
annette
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Stephen Black wrote:
> On re-reading, I see I got a bit tangled up on the 2x2 table comment
> (Why do I always find these things _after_ I send them?)
>
> What I meant was that we need the following kind of
> information:
>
>
> spanked not spanked
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> bad end
>
> good end
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> In particular, we need to know whether the percentage of those spanked
> wno came to a bad end is any greater than the percentage of those
> not-spanked who came to a bad end. And they'd better match the spanked
> and the non-spanked pretty good beforehand too. I'd bet that the
> non-spankers tend to be better educated and in a higher socio-economic
> bracket (where they learn not to spank from the college psychology
> courses they take from us). And that doesn't even touch the
> genetic/family environment causation issue.
>
> -Stephen
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stephen Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
> Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661
> Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Lennoxville, QC
> J1M 1Z7
> Canada Department web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
> Check out TIPS listserv for teachers of psychology at:
> http://www.frostburg.edu/dept/psyc/southerly/tips/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Annette Taylor, Ph. D.
Department of Psychology E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of San Diego Voice: (619) 260-4006
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
"Education is one of the few things a person
is willing to pay for and not get."
-- W. L. Bryan
