Global perspectives on physical and nonphysical discipline: A Bayesian multilevel analysis

Abstract

Background and Objective: Sixty countries worldwide have banned the use of physical punishment, yet little is known about the association of physical and nonphysical forms of child discipline with child development in a global context. The objective of this study is to examine whether physical punishment and nonphysical discipline are associated with child socioemotional functioning in a global sample of families from 62 countries and whether country-level normativeness of physical punishment and nonphysical discipline moderated those associations. Methods: Data for this study are from 215,885 families in the fourth and fifth rounds of the United Nations Children’s Fund Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. Bayesian multilevel logistic models were used to analyze the associations of physical punishment and nonphysical discipline (i.e., taking away privileges and verbal reasoning) with three different outcomes representing children’s socioemotional functioning: getting along well with other children, aggression, and becoming distracted. Results: The use of physical punishment was not associated with getting along with other children, was associated with increased aggression, and was associated with increases in distraction. Taking away privileges was associated with lower levels of getting along with other children, higher levels of aggression, and higher levels of becoming distracted. Verbal reasoning (i.e., explaining why a behavior was wrong) was associated with higher levels of getting along with other children, higher levels of aggression, and higher levels of becoming distracted. Country-level normativeness moderated some of these associations but in general the direction of effects was consistent. Conclusions: Results suggest that eliminating physical punishment would benefit children across the globe and align with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which calls for all children to be free from physical violence. More attention needs to be focused on the associations of nonphysical forms of discipline with child functioning across the globe.

The effect of spanking on early social‐emotional skills

“…It also is remarkably similar to the association between corporal punishment and young Colombian children's cognitive skills assessed using LDV and matching methods, which ranged from −.08 to −.21 SD (Cuartas et al, 2020). These results align with past studies showing negative links between spanking and selected SE‐related skills like getting along well with other children in LMICs (Grogan‐Kaylor et al, 2021; Pace et al, 2019), and reached similar conclusions by employing a comprehensive measure that considered the dimensionality of SE skills. Because SE skills are fundamental for children's success in academic and social settings for children to manage stress, attend and process information, and maintain positive relationships (Jones & Bouffard, 2012; Liew, 2012), the current findings and those from past studies collectively suggest that spanking might be detrimental for young children's development and wellbeing.…”

“…Spanking remains normative in several countries across the globe (Global Initiative to End Corporal Punishment of Children, 2021), and some conceptual frameworks suggest that the developmental consequences of spanking might differ according to its social normativeness (Deater‐Deckard & Dodge, 1997). Yet, the literature from LMICs shows consistent associations between spanking and detrimental child outcomes, including hitting other children and being easily distracted (Grogan‐Kaylor et al, 2021; Pace et al, 2019), internalizing problems (Xing & Wang, 2013), externalizing behaviors (Xing & Wang, 2013), and slower cognitive growth (Cuartas et al, 2020). While I could not directly test whether the normativeness of spanking moderated its association with SE skills, the current findings show that spanking might lead to detrimental SE outcomes in Bhutan.…”

“…Another limitation is that most studies on spanking and SE skills in LMICs used caregiver reports on spanking and SE skills (e.g., Grogan‐Kaylor et al, 2021; Pace et al, 2019; Wang & Liu, 2018; Xing & Wang, 2013), therefore having issues of shared‐method variance that can inflate the association between these variables. Furthermore, past research has primarily focused narrowly on specific SE skills, and very little research on spanking has considered the dimensionality of SE development (Jones & Bouffard, 2012).…”

“…Furthermore, past research has primarily focused narrowly on specific SE skills, and very little research on spanking has considered the dimensionality of SE development (Jones & Bouffard, 2012). For instance, Pace et al (2019) and Grogan‐Kaylor et al (2021) relied on three yes/no caregiver reported items (“the child gets along well with other children,” “the child kicks bites, or hits others,” and “the child gets distracted easily”) from UNICEF's Multiple Indicators Cluster Survey (MICS) to analyze the links between spanking and SE skills in 62 LMICs. Similarly, other studies used tools like the Child Behavior Checklist (Liu & Wang, 2018) or the Youth Self‐Report (Xing et al, 2011), which focus exclusively on behaviors and do not consider other regulatory‐related or interpersonal skills.…”

Family correlates of emotional and behavioral problems in Nepali school children

“…In the present study, physical punishment was found to associate with Externalizing Problems. Similar findings have been reported by several international studies [ 62 ]. A meta-analysis of a sample of 292 middle-class families with 8–12 years-old children from several countries (China, India, Italy, Kenya, Philippines and Thailand), found that physical punishment which included spanking, slapping, grabbing, shaking, and beating up, was associated with adverse child outcomes [ 38 ].…”