ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Physical punishment of children remains quite common and yet has only negative effects on children's health, making it an important public health problem. This study was designed to assess positive attitudes about and perceived normative support for the use of physical punishment with children, as well as attitudes regarding prohibition of physical punishment in homes and schools. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional national survey of a diverse sample of US adults (N = 3049). METHODS: This survey, conducted in Fall 2020, assessed attitudes and perceived norms regarding physical punishment use using continuous measures as well as support and perceived support for policies prohibiting physical punishment in homes and schools in the United States. RESULTS: Respondents who had positive attitudes toward physical punishment (39%) and who perceived normative support for physical punishment (41%) were not in the majority. While 65% agreed that there should be a federal ban on physical punishment in public schools, only 18% perceived that most US adults would support such a ban. Persons who were older (aged ≥55 years), men, living in the southern United States, or who themselves were hit more frequently as children were significantly less likely than their counterparts to support a federal ban in schools. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a national sample, there is strong support for a federal ban on physical punishment in US schools; yet this normative belief is unrecognized. Social norms campaigns should capitalize on this pluralistic ignorance to increase mobilization toward policy reform and reduction of harm to children through bans of physical punishment in public schools.
Subject(s)
Attitude , Punishment , Child , Male , Adult , Humans , United States , Cross-Sectional Studies , Schools , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
The relations between mothers' expressed positive and negative emotion and 55-79-month-olds' (76% European American) regulation, social competence, and adjustment were examined. Structural equation modeling was used to test the plausibility of the hypothesis that the effects of maternal expression of emotion on children's adjustment and social competence are mediated through children's dispositional regulation. Mothers' expressed emotions were assessed during interactions with their children and with maternal reports of emotions expressed in the family. Children's regulation, externalizing and internalizing problems. and social competence were rated by parents and teachers, and children's persistence was surreptitiously observed. There were unique effects of positive and negative maternal expressed emotion on children's regulation. and the relations of maternal expressed emotion to children's externalizing problem behaviors and social competence were mediated through children's regulation. Alternative models of causation were tested; a child-directed model in which maternal expressivity mediated the effects of child regulation on child outcomes did not fit the data as well.
Subject(s)
Affect , Child Behavior Disorders/diagnosis , Child Behavior Disorders/psychology , Mother-Child Relations , Mothers/psychology , Social Perception , Age Factors , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Male , Sex FactorsABSTRACT
The purpose of the study was fourfold: (a) to document the hand preferences of nonspeaking individuals with autism as they produced signs and nonsign actions; (b) to find out if sign-language proficiency in such individuals is associated with directionality or consistency of signing hand preference; (c) to explore the link between hand preference for signing and standardised measures of cognitive and motor development; (d) to compare the hand preferences (sign and nonsign actions) of such individuals to sign-learning children with normal cognitive functioning. In this study, the hand preferences of 14 nonspeaking students with autistic disorder were determined from videotape records of their sign production and nonsign actions. In their sign production, four students strongly favoured their right hands, four had a distinct left-hand preference, and six did not significantly favour either hand. There was little evidence linking sign-language proficiency, cognitive maturity, or motor development to strongly lateralised signing or handedness in general in these students. Compared with the hand preferences of the children in the two comparison groups, the autistic students were markedly less lateralised with respect to signing, but not nonsign actions.
