首页> 外文期刊>The American psychologist >The Insufficiency of the Evidence Used to Categorically Oppose Spanking and Its Implications for Families and Psychological Science: Comment on Gershoff et al. (2018)
【24h】

The Insufficiency of the Evidence Used to Categorically Oppose Spanking and Its Implications for Families and Psychological Science: Comment on Gershoff et al. (2018)

机译:证据不足,用于分类地反对打屁股及其对家庭和心理科学的影响:对Gershoff等人的评论。 (2018)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Gershoff et al. (2018) recently summarized the scientific evidence against disciplinary spanking, using epidemiological and psychological criteria for causal validity. Unfortunately, the evidence they cited would make most actions to correct serious problems appear to be harmful, whether implemented by parents (e.g., timeout) or professionals. The reason is that the type of evidence that Gershoff et al. consider adequate is insufficient for establishing a causal connection between any disciplinary response to persistent defiance and problem behaviors in children, whether that response is spanking or an effective alternative to spanking. Before opposing a widespread practice such as spanking, researchers need to document stronger causal evidence against it and identify an alternative demonstrated to be more effective.
机译:Gershoff等。 (2018年)最近将科学证据概括为纪律打击,利用流行病学和心理标准进行因果关系。 不幸的是,他们引用的证据将使大多数纠正严重问题的行动似乎是有害的,无论是由父母(例如,超时)或专业人士而实施的有害。 原因是Gershoff等人的证据类型。 考虑足够的不足以在儿童持续蔑视和问题行为之间建立任何纪律反应之间的因果关系,是否响应是打屁股或有效的打屁股替代品。 在反对诸如打屁股的广泛实践之前,研究人员需要记录更强大的因果证据,并确定表现出更有效的替代方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号