The Practice of Parenting Parenting and Child Discipline
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 01 Oct 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK Handbook of Parenting Volume 5: The Practice of Parenting Marc H. Bornstein Parenting and Child Discipline Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780429401695-3 Jennifer E. Lansford Published online on: 20 Feb 2019 How to cite :- Jennifer E. Lansford. 20 Feb 2019, Parenting and Child Discipline from: Handbook of Parenting, Volume 5: The Practice of Parenting Routledge Accessed on: 01 Oct 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780429401695-3 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. 3 PARENTING AND CHILD DISCIPLINE Jennifer E. Lansford Introduction Parents are tasked with many responsibilities in rearing their children to be competent, well- functioning members of society. These responsibilities include providing for children’s physical needs and protecting them from harm, as well as providing for socioemotional and cognitive needs by offer- ing love and stimulation. One of the most important ways that parents shape their children’s behavior is through the use of proactive discipline to encourage desired behavior in the future and reactive discipline to respond to misbehavior after it occurs. This chapter focuses on parents’ use of discipline to socialize desired child behaviors. The chapter begins by situating the study of parenting and child discipline in historical context and then presents central issues in this area of research. The chapter next turns to major theories that have guided our understanding of discipline. The bulk of the chapter then reviews research on pre- dictors of different forms of discipline, child outcomes associated with different forms of discipline, how discipline is situated within the overall climate of the parent–child relationship, and moderators and mediators of links between parental discipline and child outcomes. Then the chapter reviews practical information including interventions, laws, and policies that have attempted to alter parents’ discipline. Finally, the chapter offers suggestions for future theoretical and research directions as well as concluding comments. Historical Considerations in the Study of Parental Discipline The study of parental discipline has a long history within the fi eld of psychology. Early psychologi- cal writings on parental discipline stemmed from the theoretical tenets of behaviorism. For example, Watson, the father of behaviorism, provided childrearing advice that emphasized how parents should structure their children’s daily routines in ways to prevent misbehavior and to minimize punishment ( Watson and Watson, 1928 ). Many ideas about parents’ use of rewards and punishments to shape chil- dren’s behavior likewise stem from behaviorism (e.g., Skinner, 1938 ). Parents’ use of different forms of discipline has been subject to scientifi c inquiry at least since the publication of Sears, Maccoby, and Levin’s (1957 ) Patterns of Childrearing . This book detailed disci- pline techniques used by European-American parents in the Boston area in the 1950s, including why parents used particular discipline strategies and how discipline is related to children’s behavior. Prior to this study, researchers generally hypothesized that more parental control would be associated 65 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:38 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780429401695, chapter3, 10.4324/9780429401695-3 Jennifer E. Lansford with better child behavior, but the Sears et al. study demonstrated the opposite. This early research set the stage for subsequent research that has now tested relations between different types of parental discipline and different aspects of child development, using increasingly complex conceptual models, increasingly diverse samples, and increasingly sophisticated analyses that incorporate mediators and moderators of links between discipline and child outcomes. Central Issues in Understanding Parental Discipline Distinguishing different forms of parental discipline and methodological approaches that have been used to study parental discipline are central issues in the understanding of parental discipline. Different Forms of Parental Discipline Parental discipline can be broadly categorized as being either reactive, responding to misbehavior that has occurred already, or proactive, focusing on preventing misbehavior from occurring in the future. An overarching framework for understanding a wide range of specifi c forms of discipline includes three main categories of discipline ( Hoffman and Saltzstein, 1967 ): power assertion (which involves parents’ exertion of power and authority over the child), love withdrawal (which involves parents’ manipulation of children’s negative emotions, often through expressing anger or disapproval), and inductive reasoning (which involves discussing how other people are affected by children’s behaviors). Of these three categories, inductive reasoning has been found to be the most optimal type of discipline, predicting more positive child outcomes than either power assertion or love withdrawal ( Hoffman and Saltzstein, 1967 ). Inductive reasoning helps children to understand how their actions affect other people and provides explanations about why certain behaviors are wrong or right. Thus, inductive reasoning is proactive in trying to affect children’s future behavior rather than merely reac- tive in punishing children’s past misbehavior; indeed, moral development, empathy, and perspective taking are all enhanced by the use of inductive reasoning ( Hoffman, 1977 ). Furthermore, mothers at high risk for physically abusing their children use less inductive reasoning, more verbal and physical power assertion, and evaluate power assertion as being more appropriate than do mothers at low risk for physically abusing their children ( Chilamkurti and Milner, 1993 ). In contrast to the widely accepted benefi ts of discipline involving inductive reasoning, power- assertive discipline has been more controversial and encompasses a range of specifi c forms of disci- pline that may vary in effectiveness. Baumrind (2012) distinguishes between coercive and confrontive forms of power assertion. Parents use coercive discipline in a domineering and arbitrary way to establish their authority. By contrast, parents use confrontive discipline in a negotiable way to bring about particular child behaviors rather than merely establishing parental authority. Although coercive discipline is related to negative child outcomes, confrontive discipline might help children to regulate their behavior constructively. Within the overarching categories of power assertion, love withdrawal, and inductive reasoning, parents use a number of specifi c forms of discipline, such as removing privileges, rewarding desired behaviors, implementing time-outs, and spanking, to name a few. Monitoring children’s behavior, talking with children, using distraction, and modeling desired behaviors were the most common dis- cipline strategies in a longitudinal study of U.S. parents’ use of ten different forms of discipline with preschoolers; corporal punishment was one of the three least common strategies with preschoolers ( Socolar, Savage, and Evans, 2007 ), who are more likely to be corporally punished than either younger or older children ( Straus and Stewart, 1999 ). In other countries, parents show similar patterns of use of different forms of discipline. In a study of mothers’ reports of discipline experienced by their 2- to 4-year-old children in 24 low- and middle-income countries, the most common type of disci- pline was explaining why something was wrong, with 80% of mothers reporting that someone had 66 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 14:38 01 Oct 2021; For: 9780429401695, chapter3, 10.4324/9780429401695-3 Parenting and Child Discipline explained to their child why something was wrong in the last month ( Lansford and Deater-Deckard, 2012 ). Across the 24 countries, 63% of mothers reported that their child had experienced corporal punishment in the last month (Lansford and Deater-Deckard, 2012). Thus, although it is reassuring that the most commonly reported form of discipline is inductive reasoning, 20% of 2- to 4-year-olds across the 24 countries did not receive explanations in the last month of why something was wrong. Furthermore, although reasoning was more common than corporal punishment, the majority of chil- dren, across countries, still experienced corporal punishment in the last month. Some types of discipline appear to be common in particular cultural groups but not others. For example, Chinese parents use a form of discipline Fung (1999 ) described as “shaming” to teach chil- dren right from wrong.