Proponents of corporal punishment often cite immediate compliance as a primary justification. Research does acknowledge that corporal punishment can produce short-term cessation of undesired behavior. However, studies indicate that this compliance is often fleeting and accompanied by significant collateral effects.
According to Gershoff (2002) and subsequent meta-analyses, while immediate compliance is a documented short-term effect, the long-term efficacy of corporal punishment in teaching moral internalization is negligible. Children may avoid the behavior only in the presence of the punishing agent (the parent), failing to internalize the moral reasoning behind the rule. spanking videos best
Two primary theoretical perspectives dominate the discourse on corporal punishment: behaviorism and social learning theory. and the parent-child relationship.
The "intergenerational transmission of violence" hypothesis posits that children who are physically punished are more likely to use violence in their adult relationships. but not injury
Abstract Corporal punishment, defined as the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain, but not injury, for the purpose of correction or control, remains a highly contentious subject in developmental psychology and pediatrics. While often defended through cultural or religious traditions as a necessary tool for discipline, a substantial body of empirical research over the last three decades suggests that corporal punishment is a significant risk factor for a range of detrimental developmental outcomes. This paper reviews the current literature regarding the efficacy and consequences of corporal punishment, analyzing its impact on internalizing and externalizing behaviors, cognitive development, and the parent-child relationship.