Frownland

I'm in the bathroom at a party rn. I'll hook Chula up with some meta analysis and an explanation of why meta analysis is good later unless ped does it first.

__________________

Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth.

Chula Vista

I'll let the American College of Pediatricians reply:

https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-s...-is-misleading

__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”

Paedantic Basterd

Meta-analyses are the greatest tool we have to determine scientific fact and how a sea of findings converge to reveal a greater picture.

A case study is a snapshot of a person. A study is a snapshot of a specific population. A meta-analysis is the closest thing science has to a complete picture of a phenomenon.

The meta-analytic process involves massive teams of researchers pooling ALL of the research (some parameters specified depending on what the meta-analysis is designed to study) on a topic--and I mean scouring thousands--hundreds of thousands--of studies (both published and unpublished), then pooling and analyzing the data from those studies to examine the broad trends that are occurring in a field of research.

Meta-analyses are how we can say something with 99.9% certainty. They're how 95+% of scientists can agree upon issues like climate change and the value of vaccines. They're as concrete as science currently gets, and they're the future of scientific agreement in any given field.

**** yeah science!

Chula Vista

Not sure if you saw this link.

https://www.acpeds.org/the-college-s...-is-misleading

__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”

Paedantic Basterd

Well, first of all, I never claimed that spanking turns kids into psychopaths. I know the research isn't conclusive regarding whether spanking ruins kids. My point has only ever been that (A) spanking has proven to be less effective than other behavioural training methods and (B) if you don't have to hit someone, you shouldn't.

Regarding meta-analysis, the complaints cited are only partially valid and do not detract from the value of meta-analysis as an analytic tool. Complaining about correlational research? In that case you are going to have a problem with literally all of science, because guess what? It's all correlational. It's not possible to isolate a variable in such a way as to definitively prove causation. We can get very close, and the closer the better, but ultimately, it's all correlation.

I only skimmed the rest because this document appears to be about whether meta-analysis has shown that spanking ****s kids up, which is irrelevant to me because that was never my claim.

Chula Vista

The article points are that medicine and discipline are areas where meta-analysis is most flawed. And I wouldn't consider physics, math, and electronics as three areas of science that are corellnational.

__________________

“The fact that we live at the bottom of a deep gravity well,
on the surface of a gas covered planet going around a nuclear fireball 90 million miles away
and think this to be normal is obviously some indication of how skewed our perspective tends to be.”

djchameleon

This is the reason why it should only be done within a certain age range then weened off.

Science says otherwise on the way more cognizant front.

You have to follow through with the one two punch combo. Spank then explaination.


It isn't worse. At least the action of smacking temporarily deters them from that behavior til they can understand.

I just hope I don't run into any of your bratty Bebe's kids out in public that are being terrors to everyone in the vicinity because ya'll are on your high horse thinking you are better parents and everyone else has to deal with your monsters.

__________________

Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.

Paedantic Basterd

I mean, you're basically pitting your science against mine, and I've been studying the field of psychology (including child development) for half a decade soooo.

If you've got research to link me to, I'd be interested in reading it and evaluating it, but if not, I'm sticking with the information I trust and can validate.

djchameleon

Sauce

__________________

Fame, fortune, power, titties. People say these are the most crucial things in life, but you can have a pocket full o' gold and it doesn't mean sh*t if you don't have someone to share that gold with. Seems simple. Yet it's an important lesson to learn. Even lone wolves run in packs sometimes.

Paedantic Basterd

Okay, well even without reading the article in full, the section you quoted stated that striking a child works as well as alternative methods. Not better than.

So see point (B) I have been making: If you don't have to hit someone, why the **** are you hitting them?

EDIT: Furthermore, "The researchers concluded that spanking disobedient 2- to 6-year-olds worked just as well at reforming their behavior as 13 alternative disciplinary approaches (such as giving a time-out, reasoning with a child, and taking away privileges) as long as the parent lovingly and rationally explained the reasons for the action."

So even in the material you quoted, the study suggests that it's the explanation that makes the difference in behaviour, not the hitting itself, so again, why the **** are you hitting someone??

EDIT 2: The article you cited literally says there are 13 OTHER ways to effectively train your child apart from hitting them. This is exactly what my point is. Your research backs me up entirely.