The Science and Statistics Behind Spanking Suggests that

11-FULLER_FINAL_AFTERPROOF.DOC 2/17/2009 8:50 AM
2009] THE SCIENCE AND STATISTICS BEHIND SPANKING 291
how often they spank and how often their children misbehave. 249 Then
they hunt for a relationship between the frequency of spanking and the
child’s misbehavior. 250 Other researchers retrospectively interview
adults decades after their childhood to see whether they were spanked
and how often. 251 Then they try to link the spanking with whatever
negative behaviors the adult may have, like depression or aggression. 252
Ever since the time of Aristotle, people have known that just
because two behaviors are correlated does not mean one behavior causes
the other. 253 Even if retrospective studies could control for someone’s
inaccurate memory, they cannot tell whether spanking causes adverse
effects, or whether something else does (like someone’s temperament or
genetics). 254 Likewise, merely interviewing a mother cannot determine
whether spanking causes her child’s misbehavior, or whether her child’s
misbehavior prompts the spanking. 255 Because most spanking
researchers discover nothing more than correlations, they typically
concede that spanking “cannot be identified definitively as the cause” of
negative child behaviors. 256
A methodology that relies heavily on correlations—which is
common in child discipline research—can be used to claim almost
249. See, e.g., Straus, Corporal Punishment, supra note 20, at 37-38 (interviewing mothers of
over 3,000 children to assess spanking and to make associations); Larzelere, Meta-Analysis, supra
note 15, at 2 (“This same-source bias has been shown to inflate associations between disciplinary
tactics and adverse outcomes.”).
250. See, e.g., Straus, Corporal Punishment, supra note 20, at 39 (claiming, based on the
interviews with the mothers, that the more corporal punishment is used, the more antisocial
behavior surfaces).
251. See, e.g., Straus, ROUNDTABLE, supra note 175, at 44 (relying on one survey of sixty-one
abusive men and forty-four non-abusive men, and another survey of ninety-six couples, to show the
correlation of corporal punishment to spouse assaults).
252. See, e.g., id. (“Straus analyzed 2,143 American couples and found that the more corporal
punishment husbands and wives had experienced, the higher the probability of their assaulting a
spouse.”).
253. See, e.g., Baumrind, Specious Causal Attributions, supra note 170, at 1291 (saying that
the idea that the cause produces the effect “appears early in the writings of Aristotle and Aquinas
and is later examined systematically by Kant (1781/1965).”).
254. See, e.g., Baumrind, Specious Causal Attributions, supra note 170, at 1293 (“It is an
unsound practice at best to accept retrospective self-reports as veridical without verifying them
against independent sources of information.”).
255. See, e.g., Gershoff, supra note 199, at 550 (“[I]t is conceivable that the causal direction is
reversed from what might be expected, such that children are driving the associations (e.g.,
aggressive children tend to elicit more corporal punishment from their parents).”).
256. See, e.g., Gershoff, supra note 199, at 550 (“Because these meta-analyses are based
primarily on correlational studies, parental corporal punishment cannot be identified definitively as
the cause of these child behaviors and experiences, with the exception of immediate compliance.”).
Note that Gershoff opposes even mild physical discipline.