Predicting Black Parents’ Attitudes Toward Corporal Punishment: A Moderated-Mediation Model of Frequency and Valence of Childhood Experiences

Abstract

Child corporal punishment (CP) may lead to child physical abuse, which is a public health concern in the United States. The present study examined major risk factors predicting attitudes toward CP among a sample of Black parents (N = 394), including frequency and valence of experiences of CP during childhood, outcome expectancies of CP, and perceptions of self-efficacy and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies. Structural equation modeling results revealed that the indirect associations between CP frequency and attitudes through self-efficacy and response efficacy were moderated by CP valence. Results extend the literature and point to the need for incorporating information about efficacy of evidence-based non-physical discipline strategies into intervention messages targeting prevention of child physical abuse.

Keywords

adverse childhood experiences corporal punishment efficacy outcome expectancies child violence prevention

Introduction

Corporal punishment (CP) is “the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain but not injury for the purposes of correction or control of the child’s behavior” (Straus, 2001, p. 4). Common examples of CP include spanking, kicking, hitting a child with objects, which are likely to escalate to child physical abuse (Afifi et al., 2017; Appleton & Stanley, 2011; Black et al., 2001; Rodriguez et al., 2021). Research also reveals that CP is ineffective in managing child behavior (Durrant & Ensom, 2012; Gershoff et al., 2018) and is associated with an array of poor child outcomes including physical and mental health problems and impaired social-emotional development (Cuartas, 2022; Ferguson, 2013; Gershoff et al., 2012).

Studies have established that childhood experiences of CP are a powerful predictor of parents’ positive attitudes toward using CP to discipline children (Ateah & Durrant, 2005; Duong, 2021; Holden, 2020), which is a mechanism perpetuating the transmission of parental physical aggression across generations, leading to the persistence of this parenting practice across racial groups in the United States (Berlin et al., 2011; Niu et al., 2018). Researchers have recommended that changing parents’ attitudes toward CP is an effective way to break this cycle of violence (Gagné et al., 2007; Holden et al., 2014). Several studies have tested CP intervention messages targeting attitudes as a key psychological outcome affecting parents’ intentions to use CP (Chavis et al., 2013; Gershoff et al., 2017; Holden et al., 2014; Reich et al., 2012). However, researchers suggest that more studies are needed to understand the mechanism through which childhood experiences of CP affect attitudes (Finzi-Dottan & Harel, 2014). Moreover, research has found that not all parents experiencing CP during childhood endorse the use of CP to discipline children (Wang et al., 2021), which suggests the possibility that there may be factors moderating the association between childhood experiences of CP and attitudes toward CP.

Black Parents’ Attitudes Toward CP

While parents across racial and ethnic groups in the United States widely approve of CP with estimates ranging from 65% to 90% (Fleckman et al., 2019), research reveals that Black parents report higher rates of CP approval compared to other racial groups (Chiocca, 2017; Klevens et al., 2019; Su et al., 2019). Black parents tend to view CP as a common approach to manage child behavior (Klevens et al., 2019). Moreover, the belief that CP is a necessary and effective child discipline strategy is more common in Black families in contrast to other racial groups (Chiocca, 2017; Mogro-Wilson et al., 2019). Research found that parents who believe that CP is more effective than alternative discipline strategies are more likely to engage in CP (Klevens et al., 2019; Magariño et al., 2021) and less likely to be responsive to others’ advice about not using CP (Duong et al., 2022).

Multiple factors, including systemic racism (Su et al., 2019), implicit bias as a reflection of systemic racism (Payne & Hannay, 2021), and religious fundamentalism (Beller et al., 2021) reinforce the idea that CP is necessary for disciplining children in Black communities. CP can be traced back to the slave trade in the United States when physical assaults were used to ensure compliance and submission of enslaved people. Parental beliefs in the necessity of CP may have arisen as attempts to protect their children from severe and lethal assaults by enslavers (Thomas & Dettlaff, 2011). Continued structural and systemic racism have perpetuated the use of CP among Black families through experiential belief that CP is instrumental in teaching children obedience necessary for survival (Taylor, Hamvas, Paris et al., 2011; Thomas & Dettlaff, 2011). Black parents may use CP as a tool for compliance and believe that using CP is a way to protect their children from systemic violence including police brutality (Brodsky & DeVet, 2000; Su et al., 2019; Taylor, Hamvas, Paris et al., 2011). Religious fundamentalism is also associated with Black parents’ beliefs of inherent “badness” and “dangerousness” warranting early, harsh and controlling treatment of children (e.g., interpretation of “spare the rod, spoil the child”; Beller et al. 2021; MacKenzie et al. 2011). Thus, examining factors influencing Black parents’ attitudes toward CP is necessary to support interventions.

Frequency of Childhood Experiences of CP

Research has consistently found that frequency of CP during childhood (hereafter, CP frequency) is positively associated with positive attitudes toward CP (Holden, 2020; Rodriguez et al., 2020; Straus, 2001; Walker et al., 2018; Widom & Wilson, 2015). That is, the more frequently individuals are physically punished by their caregivers during their childhood, the more likely they are to view CP as a positive disciplinary practice. The social cognitive theory suggests that parenting attitudes are learned in a social context and influenced by outcome expectancies (Bandura, 1986). In this perspective, parents’ current child discipline behaviors are informed by their past experiences with harsh disciplines implemented by their own parents. During this learning process, parents observe tangible expected outcomes of CP (e.g., their behavioral compliance to their parents’ discipline messages) and subsequently develop behavioral expectations that shape their positive attitudes toward CP. Thus, parents who had direct experiences with CP during childhood are likely influenced by their own experiences and expect compliance from their children when they use CP to correct children’s misbehaviors (Berlin et al., 2011).

In contrast to CP as one ineffective attempt to correct child misbehavior (Wekerle et al., 2019), multiple non-physical discipline strategies (e.g., timeout or non-punitive reinforcement) have demonstrated effectiveness for managing child behavior (Fortson et al., 2016). However, to adopt non-physical discipline strategies, parents require high self-efficacy, which refers to parents’ perceptions of their ability to implement non-physical discipline tactics (Bandura, 2004; Duong et al., 2021). Simultaneously, parents need to possess a high level of response efficacy, or perception that non-physical discipline strategies will yield desirable outcomes (Duong et al., 2021; Witte, 1992). Parents who frequently experienced CP during childhood may have limited exposure to evidence-based non-physical discipline strategies, few opportunities for learning and practicing effective child behavior management strategies, and hence limited opportunities to form expectations of desirable outcomes of these strategies (Duong et al., 2021; Rodriguez et al., 2018). Black parents tend to perceive that CP has an instrumental role in cultivating a child’s respect to authority figures, promoting the child’s safety, and gaining behavioral compliance (Taylor, Hamvas, Paris et al., 2011). Moreover, Black parents often cite their past experiences of CP accompanied by positive outcomes as an explanation for their use of CP and perceived non-physical discipline strategies as ineffective at improving child behavior (Duong et al., 2021). In sum, research suggests that parents who were frequently punished with physical discipline during childhood likely develop expectations of CP as an effective parenting approach to manage children, while perceiving a low level of efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies. Thus, we hypothesize:

H1: Participants who report higher CP frequency will also report (a) higher CP outcome expectancies, (b) lower perceptions of self-efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies, and (c) lower perceptions of response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies.

Predicting Parents’ Attitudes Toward CP

Studies have established that positive attitudes toward CP are a major risk factor leading to parents’ adoption of CP to discipline children (Ateah & Durrant, 2005; Chavis et al., 2013; Duong, 2022; Holden, 2020). According to the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB, Ajzen, 2011), attitudes are a function of beliefs that reflect people’s tendency to respond to a behavior with favorableness or unfavorableness, which predicts intentions to engage in a behavior (Fishbein, 2008; Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). Attitudes are shaped by beliefs underpinning a behavior and the degree to which these beliefs are salient, or assessable, to individuals (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2000). Beliefs about harmful or beneficial outcomes of a behavior are influential in shaping how people evaluate a behavior (i.e., outcome expectancies). More specifically, if people expect that performing a behavior will lead to desirable outcomes, they are more likely to view the behavior as positive and beneficial. In turn, their attitudes toward the behavior become more positive (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).

Several studies have shown that outcome expectancies of CP are a strong predictor of parents’ attitudes toward CP (Gagné et al., 2007; Taylor, Hamvas, Rice et al., 2011; Taylor et al., 2017). Parents tend to believe that using CP to discipline children will result in desirable outcomes, including reducing unwanted behaviors (Crouch & Behl, 2001; Pinderhughes et al., 2000), preventing dangerous situational threats to children’s well-beings (Taylor, Hamvas, Paris et al., 2011), and increasing child behavioral compliance (Holden, 2020). While such beliefs have been found across parents of all races, studies reveal that Black parents tend to believe that using CP is effective to teach their children about respecting others, preventing future harmful consequences, and helping their children survive in a racist society (Duong et al., 2022; Taylor, Hamvas, Rice et al., 2011; Thomas & Dettlaff, 2011). For example, commonly reported themes include (a) the use of CP to address transgressions related to a child’s disrespectful behaviors; (b) the belief that CP cultivates the value of respect in their children’s minds, which has long-term benefits not only to their children, their families, but also society; (c) the belief that without CP to correct misbehaviors, children may engage in delinquent activities (Taylor, Hamvas, Rice et al., 2011), and (d) the attribution that CP is an explanatory factor for their children not being among “those shooting boys at schools” (Duong et al., 2022, p. 1417). A related common perception is that CP protects Black children against hostile interactions with law enforcement agencies. These expectations may suggest a coping mechanism to ensure successful survival within the historical context of pervasive racism surrounding their lives (Thomas & Dettlaff, 2011). Hence, some Black parents report that they feel distrustful of parenting classes that promote non-physical discipline tactics and consider these tactics as White people’s way to raise children, which they do not identify as part of their Black parenting culture (Duong et al., 2022; Klevens et al., 2019).

Studies show that parents are often aware of non-physical discipline strategies that do not involve force (Duong et al., 2021; Straus & Fauchier, 2007; Socolar, 1997). Even so, they report a low level of self-efficacy and response efficacy regarding adopting non-physical discipline strategies. For example, some Black parents report that they use timeout, take things away, and force children to write chunks of text (Duong et al., 2021; Klevens et al., 2019). Nevertheless, they also observe that these non-physical discipline strategies tend not to work as they expected and thus, they report that they would still apply CP when these strategies fail (Duong et al., 2021). These parents also perceive that they do not have sufficient resources to implement certain non-physical discipline strategies (e.g., providing tangible rewards, Duong et al., 2021). Thus, they likely maintain positive attitudes toward CP when they believe that their ability and available resources to adopt non-physical discipline strategies are limited (i.e., self-efficacy) and that non-physical discipline strategies are less effective than CP to achieve the expected behavioral outcomes (i.e., response efficacy). Both self-efficacy and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies have been found to predict attitudes toward CP (Duong, 2022). Based on this literature, we predict:

H2a: Outcome expectancies will be positively associated with attitudes toward CP.

H2b: Self-efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies will be negatively associated with attitudes toward CP.

H2c: Response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies will be negatively associated with attitudes toward CP.

The Moderating Role of Valence of Childhood Experiences

While several studies provide support for the intergenerational hypothesis that a history of CP predicts the continuation of CP in the future (Muller et al., 1995; Niu et al., 2018; Widom & Wilson, 2015), researchers note that not all parents who reported childhood experiences of CP adopt CP when they become parents (Duong & Sirohi, 2023; Klevens et al., 2019). Qualitative evidence shows that a possible explanation is that parents differ in their evaluations of their experiences of CP during their childhood (Duong et al., 2022). More specifically, while some parents report that despite being frequently hit by their parents, they still view CP as unharmful to their well-being, which leads to parents perceiving that their direct childhood experiences of CP were positive regardless of the CP frequency administered by their own parents. On the contrary, other parents may hold a negative view of their direct experiences of CP when recalling such childhood events. For these parents, it is likely that even a limited amount of CP suffered during childhood may still trigger hurtful childhood memories, perceived harm, and interpersonal harm aversion (Decety & Cowell, 2018). According to the TPB (Ajzen, 2011), positive or negative feelings attached to a past behavior is referred to as the valence of the behavior. In this study, we define the valence of childhood experiences of CP (hereafter, CP valence) as the degree to which parents report their childhood experiences of CP as emotionally and physically hurtful to them. It is likely that parents who report negative CP experiences will not endorse CP, view CP outcomes negatively, and therefore be more open to learning and using non-physical discipline strategies as alternatives to CP. Based on the literature reviewed herein, we posit that self-efficacy and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies, and CP outcome expectancies, will mediate the association between CP frequency and attitudes toward CP. Furthermore, we predict that CP valence functions as a moderating factor conditioning these indirect associations. Specifically, we hypothesize:

H3: CP frequency will have indirect and positive associations with attitudes toward CP as mediated by (a) outcome expectancies, (b) self-efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies, and (c) response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies. These associations will be significant among participants who report no negative CP valence, and not among those who report negative CP valence.

Methods

Participants and Procedure

This study was part of a larger online experiment examining Black parents’ perceptions and attitudes toward CP. Inclusion criteria were Black parents in the United States who were living with at least one child younger than 11 years of age. Data were collected by Toluna through its online survey panels (https://www.toluna-group.com), which include a network of partners with exclusive and deep relationships, which include traditional access panels, co-branded panels, or opt-in databases of individuals throughout the United States who agreed to complete research projects and also undertake non-market research activities for payment. Toluna sent a survey link that hosted a questionnaire to potential participants over the course of 7 weeks during June and July 2022. Eligible participants, who met inclusion criteria and agreed with the informed consent, participated in the survey. Participants first reported their demographics, CP frequency, CP valence, and outcome expectancies at the pre-test stage. Participants responded to a questionnaire that included scales measuring self-efficacy, response efficacy, and attitudes toward CP at the post-test stage. Attention check items were included in the questionnaire to ensure participants’ attention. Each participant was paid approximately $4 for their time. No personal identifiers of participants were collected. The research protocol received ethical approval from the University’s Institutional Review Board.

A total of 963 participants consented and completed the study. After data cleaning (removing participants who had incomplete responses, same response patterns, and failed attention check items), the working sample included 394 Black parents whose age ranged between 18 and 78 years (M = 38; SD = 11.7). The majority reported low annual household income (75.9% earned below $60,000). Participants on average reported having two children whose average age was 6 years old. More participants reported having only boys (42.4%) compared to those who reported having only girls (32.2%), and those who had both boys and girls (25.4%). Table 1 reported participants’ profiles.

Table 1.

Demographics.

Participant characteristics	N	%
Sex
Male	130	33
Female	264	67
Marital status
Single	113	28.7
Married	193	49
Never married	21	5.3
Previously married	67	17
Education
Grade school	17	4.3
Some high school	30	7.6
Completed high school	72	18.3
Some college or technical school	149	37.8
Completed 4 years of college	74	18.8
Some graduate education	27	6.9
Completed graduate education	25	6.3
Income
0–2,999	18	4.6
3,000–7,999	25	6.3
8,000–12,999	14	3.6
13,000–19,999	32	8.1
20,000–29,999	56	14.2
30,000–39,999	39	9.9
40,000–49,999	55	14
50,000–59,999	60	15.2
60,000–70,000	37	9.4
Over 70,000	58	14.7
Religion
Protestant	36	9.1
Roman Catholic	28	7.1
Mormon	11	2.8
Orthodox	3	.8
Jewish	19	4.8
Muslim	20	5.1
Buddhism	12	3
Christian	150	38.1
Baptist	38	9.6
Atheist	7	1.8
Lutheran	18	4.6
Other	9	2.3
None	43	10.9
Child gender
Only boys	167	42.4
Only girls	127	32.2
Both boys and girls	100	25.4
Living situation
Single parent	99	25.1
Married and living with a partner who’s the child’s parent	183	46.4
Married to a partner who’s not the child’s parents	52	13.2
Not married and living with a partner who’s the child’s parent	26	6.6
Not married and living a partner who is not the child’s parent	12	3
Other living situation	22	5.6

Measures

CP Frequency

CP frequency was assessed by five items asking participants to report how often they were physically punished by their own parents (Fauchier & Straus, 2010). The reference time for these behaviors was when participants were 6 to 10 years old to ensure participants’ ability to recall the events (Fleming & Borrego, 2019). A sample item was “How often did your parents spank, slap, smack, kick, or swat you?(1-never; 5-very often”).

CP Valence

CP valence was operationalized as the degree to which participants felt that their childhood experiences of CP was physically and emotionally hurtful to them: “To what extent do you think your parents’ use of physical discipline emotionally hurt you?” and “To what extent do you think your parents’ use of physical discipline physically hurt you?” (1-not at all; 5-very hurtful).

Outcome Expectancies

Informed by the literature on Black parents’ perceptions of CP and outcomes (Duong et al., 2022; Klevens et al., 2019; Taylor, Hamvas, Paris et al., 2011), a scale was developed to assess outcome expectancies using three items assessing the extent to which participants believe in the positive outcomes of CP for Black children. A sample item was “I believe using physical discipline measures (spanking/slapping/popping) will help Black children to learn about respecting others” (1-strongly disagree; 5-strongly agree).

Perceived Efficacy of Non-physical Discipline Strategies

Based on prior research (Duong, 2022), self-efficacy was assessed using two items (e.g., “I am confident I can use non-physical disciplines to correct my child’s misbehavior, even when he/she keep ignoring me,” 1-strongly disagree; 5-strongly agree), while response efficacy was measured using three items (e.g., “I believe that non-physical types of discipline work well to correct my child’s misbehavior,” 1-strongly disagree; 5-strongly agree).

Attitudes Toward CP

Attitudes were assessed with 10 items adopted from the Attitudes Toward Spanking Scale (ATS, Holden, 2001). Sample items were “Sometimes, a spank and/or a slap is the best way to get a child to listen” and “When all is said and done, spanking and/or slapping is harmful for a child (recode)” (1-strongly disagree; 5-strongly agree).

Covariates

Research has established influential factors affecting efficacy perceptions and attitudes in the CP context, including psychological stress (Bandura, 1977; Holden et al., 2014; Straus, 2001), perceived racism (Thomas & Dettlaff, 2011), and religiosity (Wolf & Kepple, 2019). Parents’ gender, age, race, education, religious affiliation, and household income, child aggressive behavior, child’s gender and age were also found to affect parents’ consideration of using CP (Baniamin, 2022; Gagné et al., 2007; Gershoff et al., 2017; Mehlhausen-Hassoen, 2021). Thus, these variables were measured as covariates.

Data Analysis

Analyses were conducted using SPSS (Version 27, IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA) and Mplus (Version 8.4, Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén) Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations of variables were computed. Data showed that exposure conditions did not affect the three outcome variables measured at post-test (i.e., one-way analysis of variance results revealed no differences between the experimental conditions regarding self-efficacy (F[6,387] = 1.004; p = .42), response efficacy (F[6,387] = 0.286; p = .94), and attitudes (F[6,387] = 1.576; p = .15). A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to validate the measurements. Structural equation modeling (SEM) with maximum likelihood estimation was conducted to test the moderated-mediation model (Edwards & Lambert, 2007). The indices of comparative fit index (CFI ≥ 0.90), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI ≥ 0.90), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA ≤ 0.08), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR ≤ 0.08) were used to assess model fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). All variables were standardized to minimize multicollinearity. All covariates plus the experimental conditions were included as control variables in the model test. Bootstrapping methods using 5,000 replications of samples were used to calculate the results. Parameter estimates were statistically significant when the 95% confidence intervals (CI) did not include zero (Hayes, 2017).

Results

As shown in Table 2, most correlations between key variables were significant (coefficients were between 0.11 and 0.65). The directions of the correlations were as expected. Specifically, reported CP experience frequency was positively correlated with positive outcome expectancies (r = .31) and attitudes (r = .29), while negatively correlated with response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies (r = −.15). Favorable CP outcome expectancies were negatively correlated with self-efficacy (r = −.27) and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies (r = −.39), while having a positive correlation with positive CP attitudes (r = .65). Finally, both self-efficacy and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies were negatively correlated with attitudes (r = −.55 and r = −.44, respectively). Additionally, reliability results indicated acceptable and satisfactory internal consistency. The CFA results validated the measures used in this study: χ²(260) = 616.815, p < .001; CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.95, RMSEA = 0.06, SRMR = 0.04. As shown in Table 3, factor loadings of most scale items were all above 0.70, which met the robust factor loading criterion (a cut-off value of 0.70, Hair et al., 2010). Only two items showed factor loadings of less than 0.70, but still above 0.60 (one item in the CP frequency scale and one item in the ATS). Based on prior methodological guidance and practice (Awang, 2014), the two items were retained in the analysis.

Table 2.

Bivariate Correlations, Descriptive Statistics, and Internal Consistency.

Variables	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1. CEF
2. CEV	0.56*
3. OEXP	0.31**	−0.02
4. SE	−0.03	0.18**	−0.27**
5. RE	−0.15**	0.11*	−0.39**	0.65**
6. ATS	0.29**	−0.08	0.65**	−0.55**	−0.44**
7. CAB	0.41**	0.36**	0.35**	0.00	−0.13*	0.22**
8. REL	0.13**	0.07	0.18**	0.03	0.03	0.17**	0.19**
9. PRACE	0.41**	0.30**	0.20**	0.03	−0.12*	0.19**	0.45**	0.13**
10. Stress	0.38**	0.38**	0.16**	−0.03	−0.13**	0.19**	0.53**	−0.06	0.44**
11. PA	−0.07	−0.15**	0.01	−0.15**	−0.08	0.06	−0.22**	0.09	−0.10*	−0.27**
12. CA	−0.01	−0.01	0.01	−0.05	−0.02	−0.01	−0.05	0.17**	−0.06	−0.09	0.25**
13. Income	−0.05	0.01	0.00	−0.01	−0.01	−0.03	0.13*	0.19**	0.05	−0.03	0.00	0.15**
Mean	2.40	2.56	2.55	3.75	3.79	3.81	1.94	2.86	2.63	2.51	38	6
SD	1.06	1.32	1.29	1.06	.99	1.93	.87	1.09	1.06	1.06	11.7	3.24
Reliability	.86 (α)	.73 (r)	.89	.69 (r)	.89 (α)	.95 (α)	.86 (α)	.86 (α)	.91 (α)	.88 (α)	—	—

Note. ATS = attitudes toward spanking; CA = Child’s age; CAB = child aggressive behavior; CEF = CP frequency; CEV = CP valence; OEXP = outcome expectancies; PA = parent’s age; PRACE = perceived racism; RE = response efficacy; REL = religiosity; SE = Self-efficacy.

All correlations for measure reliability were significant (p < .01).

p < .05. **p < .01.

Table 3.

Factor Loadings of Key Measures.

Variable	Items	Factor Loading
Frequency of CP during childhood	How often did your parents spank, slap, smack, kick, or swat you?	0.75
	How often did your parents use a tree branch, belt, wooden spoon or other objects to hit you?	0.77
	How often did your parents throw flip-flops, tools, or other any objects at you when they were angry with your misbehavior?	0.78
	How often did you parents pinch your ear or shove your head when you misbehaved?	0.74
	How often did your parents ask you to do push-up or put books on your head as a form of punishment?	0.63
Valence of CP experience	To what extent do you think your parents’ use of physical discipline physically hurt you?	0.90
Valence of CP experience	To what extent do you think your parents’ use of physical discipline emotionally hurt you?	0.82
Outcome expectancy	I believe using physical discipline measures (spanking/slapping/popping, etc.) will help Black children to learn about respecting others	0.89
	I believe using physical discipline measures will prevent Black children from having future problems (drug use, violence, delinquency, etc.)	0.84
	I believe using physical discipline measures will train Black children to prepare well for the harsh reality in our society.	0.84
Self-efficacy	I believe I can always use non-physical disciplines to correct my child’s misbehavior, even when his/her misbehavior is serious	0.84
Self-efficacy	I am confident I can use non-physical disciplines to correct my child’s misbehavior, even when he/she keep ignoring me	0.82
Response efficacy	I believe that non-physical forms of discipline are very effective in correcting my child’s misbehavior	0.87
	I believe that non-physical types of discipline work well to correct my child’s misbehavior	0.82
	I believe that non-physical disciplines are very effective at preventing my child’s misbehavior	0.86
Attitudes	Overall, I believe spanking and/or a slapping is a good disciplinary technique	0.86
	Spanking and/or slapping a child is a normal part of parenting	0.86
	Sometimes, a spank and/or a slap is the best way to get a child to listen	0.87
	A spank and/or a slap is an effective method to change a child’s behavior for the long term	0.88
	Sometimes, spanking and/or slapping is necessary to instill proper moral and social conduct	0.86
	Sometimes, the only way to get a child to behave is with a spank and/or a slap	0.78
	One of the best ways for a child to learn “no” is to spank and/or a slap him/her after disobedience	0.66
	If a child is spanked and/or a slapped for a misbehavior, he or she should always be spanked/slapped for that misbehavior	0.90
	When all is said and done, spanking and/or a slapping is beneficial for a child	0.78
	I believe it is the parent’s right to spank and/or to slap their children if they think it is necessary	0.92

Note. CP = corporal punishment.

All factor loadings are significant at p < .001.

The SEM results testing the moderated-mediation model showed an acceptable model fit with the data: χ²(5) = 9.508, p = .46; CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.04, SRMR = 0.01. H1 predicted that participants who reported higher CP frequency would report higher outcome expectancies (H1a), lower perceptions of self-efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies (H1b), and lower perceptions of response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies (H1c). Data showed support for H1a (β = .62, SE = 0.12, 95% CI [0.519, 0.993]), H1b (β = −.47, SE = 0.14, 95% CI [−0.697, −0.246]) and H1c (β = −.76, SE = 0.12, 95% CI [−0.906, −0.525]).

H2 posited that outcome expectancies positively predicted attitudes toward CP (H2a), while self-efficacy and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies negatively predicted attitudes (H2b-c). Results supported H2a (β = .48, SE = 0.05, 95% CI [0.358, 0.493]), H2b (β = −.13, SE = 0.04, 95% CI [−0.219, −0.067]), and H2c (β = −.27, SE = 0.05, 95% CI [−0.394, −0.223]). H3 posited that CP frequency would indirectly and positively predict attitudes toward CP, mediated by outcome expectancies (H3a), self-efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies (H3b), and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies (H3c), and that these association would not be significant among participants who reported negative CP valence. Results showed that H3a was not supported because the indirect association between CP frequency and attitudes through outcome expectancies remained significant at all three levels of CP valence (not hurtful: β = .28, SE = 0.05, p < .001, slightly hurtful: β = .23, SE = 0.04, p < .001, and very hurtful: β = .19, SE = 0.04, p < .001). However, data supported H3b as the indirect association between CP frequency and attitudes through self-efficacy was significant when CP valence was reported as not hurtful or slightly hurtful (β = .05, SE = 0.02, p < .05, and β = .03, SE = 0.02, p < .001, respectively). The association was no longer significant when CP valence was reported as very hurtful (β = .02, SE = 0.01, p = .17). Similarly, data supported H4c by indicating that the indirect association between CP frequency and attitudes through response efficacy was significant when CP valence was reported as not hurtful or slightly hurtful (β = .17, SE = 0.04, p < .001, and β = .10, SE = 0.03, p < .001, respectively). When CP valence was reported as very hurtful, this indirect association became nonsignificant (β = .03, SE = 0.02, p = .16).

Discussion

Direct experiences of CP during childhood have been found to influence current attitudes toward CP, which creates and perpetuates the cycle of violence in families (Berlin et al., 2011; Muller et al., 1995; Widom & Wilson, 2015). However, few studies have examined mechanisms that characterize the link between CP frequency and the formation of attitudes supporting CP. Additionally, few studies have considered perceived efficacy of non-physical discipline measures and the role of CP valence in this context. Thus, the current research tests a moderated-mediation model hypothesizing the inter-relationships among CP frequency and CP valence, outcome expectancies, self-efficacy and response efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies, and attitudes toward CP.

Results show support for most of the study’s hypotheses. Specifically, the more frequently participants were physically punished during their childhood, the more they perceive that the outcomes of CP would be beneficial, the less they perceive their ability to implement non-physical discipline strategies, and the less they perceive that using non-physical disciplinary strategies would be effective. These findings are consistent with prior studies showing that Black parents often talked about CP administered by their own parents as an effective approach to control them and to train them to be ready for future adverse events (Duong et al., 2022; Paschall et al., 2003; Simons et al., 1993; Taylor, Hamvas, Paris et al., 2011).

Results indicate that participants expecting that CP would result in positive outcomes tend to report more positive attitudes toward CP. Additionally, participants who report lower perceptions of ability to conduct non-physical discipline strategies and lower perceptions of the effectiveness of non-physical discipline strategies hold more positive attitudes toward CP. These findings are consistent with theories about the behavioral beliefs underpinning the formation of attitudes (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). That is, people’s expectations of the outcomes of a behavior shape their overall evaluation of the behavior to form attitudes toward the behavior. When CP is regarded as beneficial and effective, alternative non-physical discipline strategies are unlikely to be considered as replacements despite parents’ awareness of available non-physical discipline options (Duong et al., 2021; Klevens et al., 2019). Thus, low perceived efficacy of non-physical discipline strategies likely reinforces parents’ positive attitudes toward CP as found in the current study. These findings suggest that low perceived efficacy can be a risk factor contributing to forming positive attitudes toward CP.

The moderated-mediation results indicate that the indirect associations between CP frequency and attitudes through self-efficacy and response efficacy of alternative discipline strategies are significant among participants who report CP valence as not hurtful or slightly hurtful. These associations are absent among participant who view their CP experiences as very hurtful. These results suggest that the influence of CP frequency on attitudes through efficacy pathways depends on the degree to which participants evaluate how they feel about their own CP experiences. Thus, the incorporation of CP valence in the model helps to establish a boundary condition to theorize the association between CP frequency and attitudes through efficacy mediating mechanisms. Additionally, moderated-mediation results show that outcome expectancies remain a significant mediating mechanism linking CP frequency and attitudes independent of the levels of CP valence. This finding lends support to the powerful role of outcome expectancies in shaping positive attitudes toward CP. This is consistent with prior studies revealing that parents overwhelmingly accept that if CP works for them even when their own parents repeatedly punished them, they would endorse the use of CP as an effective way to teach children to behave (Chiocca 2017; Holden, 2020; Niu et al., 2018). As such, results indicate the need to persuade parents to change the way they perceive CP outcomes via continuing to educate them about the harmful effects of CP, providing evidence-based information about the effectiveness of non-physical child management strategies, and providing early normative opportunities for successfully using effective child behavior management strategies.

Limitations and Implications

Several limitations should be noted in the current study. First, this study used cross-sectional survey data and thus, it could not confirm a causal relationship between the independent and dependent variables nor was the study designed for testing of cause or causal reversal. Second, the relatively small sample (N = 394), although yielding sufficient power, was not representative and findings may not be generalized at the population level. Third, measures relied on parent-reported data, which may result in biased information due to social desirability. Fourth, this study did not ask participants to report their living locations (i.e., states) and so, interpretations of results relating to regions were limited. Finally, the majority of parent respondents were mothers (67%) and therefore, findings might be more reflective of mothers as compared to fathers. Future research may benefit from the use of a prospective, longitudinal design. Future studies should also consider recruiting a more gender-balanced sample to enhance generalizability.

While this study sample does not represent the likely diversity of views within the general population of Black parents living in the United States with children, it is sufficiently powered to test the hypothesized model. Within social welfare and psychology research, our approach to data collection was unique in that the online survey approach used a network of partners and databases of individuals throughout the United States who anonymously expressed interest in nonmarket research activities. This was in contrast with several prior studies relying on samples recruited within education, social welfare, psychological, or medical settings in which participants, particularly Black parents, have been historically harmed. Moreover, given the fundamental lack of research centered on the perspectives of Black parents to inform culturally relevant, acceptable, and evidence-based approaches to optimizing parent practices, this study also represented an attempt to avoid the issue of minority racial and ethnic groups being lumped together to compared with White samples, resulting in data that are illusive and not useful to inform interventions for the minority groups (Bent-Goodley, 2021; Fontes, 2005).

Findings hold important theoretical and practical implications for informing interventions aimed at reducing parent use of CP. Theoretically, we found empirical support for the predictions that outcome expectancies and perceived efficacy serving as mediating mechanisms explaining how CP frequency might shape attitudes toward CP among Black parents. Public health research has established the need for behavioral change messages to target attitudinal change toward an unhealthy behavior while simultaneously promoting efficacy perceptions of alternative healthy behaviors (Fishbein & Cappella, 2006; Fishbein & Yzer, 2003). Research about CP has also found evidence consistent with this perspective (Duong et al., 2021; Rodriguez et al., 2018; Taylor et al., 2017). These cognitive mechanisms provide potentially interesting research direction that has not been adequately explored. Additionally, findings related to the moderating role of CP valence revealed a boundary condition in which some parents who frequently received harsh punishments during their own childhood go on viewing CP strategies as effective, whereas others consider them as ineffective, thereby likely attenuating the relationship between CP frequency in childhood and favorable endorsement of CP. Results related to the role of CP valence also suggested the need for closer examination of how parents frame their own childhood CP experiences to evaluate whether the experience was hurtful to them.

Continued research examining CP frequency and valence can help unravel their interactive relationships to reveal more insights helping practitioners to design and tailor prevention messages and intervention efforts. Currently, there is a virtual absence of clinical research that examines experimental manipulation of effective messaging, which clinicians can apply. Practical findings point to the need for future clinical research that can inform clinicians about effective messaging strategies they can use not only to underscore problematic outcomes of CP based on scientific research (e.g., see Holden et al., 2014), but also for embedding culturally relevant educational information about positive parenting techniques.

Footnotes

Disclaimer

The findings and conclusions in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the funding agency.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article: Department of Communication, Georgia State University.

ORCID iD

Hue Trong Duong

Author Biographies

Hue Duong, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication, College of Arts and Sciences, Georgia State University. His research focuses on health communication, social influence, media and message effect, and violence prevention.

Akansha Sirohi, M.A., is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Communication, Georgia State University. Her primary areas of interest are global health communication, media effect, violence prevention, and behavioral change.

Kathleen M. Baggett, Ph.D., directs the Mark Chaffin Center for Healthy Development at Georgia State University. She is a tenured Associate Professor and Second Century Initiative Scholar of Health Policy and Behavioral Sciences in the School of Public Health, Georgia State University.

References

Afifi

T. O.

Ford

Gershoff

E. T.

Merrick

Grogan-Kaylor

Ports

K. A.

MacMillan

H. L.

Holden

G. W.

Taylor

C. A.

Lee

S. J.

Bennett

R. P.

(2017). Spanking and adult mental health impairment: The case for the designation of spanking as an adverse childhood experience. Child Abuse & Neglect, 71, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.01.014

Ajzen

(2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psychology & Health, 26(9), 1113–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.613995

Ajzen

Fishbein

(1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behaviour. Prentice-Hall.

Ajzen

Fishbein

(2000). Attitudes and the attitude-behavior relation: Reasoned and automatic processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 11(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779943000116

Appleton

J. V.

Stanley

(2011). Physical abuse and corporal punishment. Child Abuse Review, 20(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.1168

Ateah

C. A.

Durrant

J. E.

(2005). Maternal use of physical punishment in response to child misbehavior: Implications for child abuse prevention. Child Abuse & Neglect, 29(2), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2004.10.010

Awang

(2014). Research methodology and data analysis (2nd ed.). UiTM Press.

Bandura

(2004). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198104263660

Bandura

(1986). The explanatory and predictive scope of self-efficacy theory. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), 359–373. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.1986.4.3.359

10.

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

11.

Baniamin

H. M.

(2022). Variations in the acceptance of parental corporal punishment of children: What matters? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(19–20), 18006–18031. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211035856

12.

Beller

Kröger

Kliem

(2021). Slapping them into heaven? Individual and social religiosity, religious fundamentalism, and belief in heaven and hell as predictors of support for corporal punishment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(15–16), NP8482–NP8497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519842857

13.

Bent-Goodley

(2021). Diversity in interpersonal violence research. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(11–12), 4937–4952. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605211013

14.

Berlin

L. J.

Appleyard

Dodge

K. A.

(2011). Intergenerational continuity in child maltreatment: Mediating mechanisms and implications for prevention: Intergenerational continuity. Child Development, 82(1), 162–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01547.x

15.

Black

D. A.

Heyman

R. E.

Slep

A. M. S.

(2001). Risk factors for child physical abuse. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 121–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(00)00021-5

16.

Brodsky

A. E.

DeVet

K. A.

(2000). “You have to be real strong”: Parenting goals and strategies of resilient, urban, African American, single mothers. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 20(1–2), 159–178. https://doi.org/10.1300/J005v20n01_11

17.

Chavis

Hudnut-Beumler

Webb

M. W.

Neely

J. A.

Bickman

Dietrich

M. S.

Scholer

S. J.

(2013). A brief intervention affects parents’ attitudes toward using less physical punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37(12), 1192–1201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.06.003

18.

Chiocca

E. M.

(2017). American parents’ attitudes and beliefs about corporal punishment: An integrative literature review. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 31(3), 372–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedhc.2017.01.002

19.

Crouch

J. L.

Behl

L. E.

(2001). Relationships among parental beliefs in corporal punishment, reported stress, and physical child abuse potential. Child Abuse & Neglect, 25(3), 413–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0145-2134(00)00256-8

20.

Cuartas

(2022). Corporal punishment and child development in low-and-middle-income countries: Progress, challenges, and directions. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-022-01362-3

21.

Decety

Cowell

J. M.

(2018). Interpersonal harm aversion as a necessary foundation for morality: A developmental neuroscience perspective. Development and Psychopathology, 30(1), 153–164. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579417000530

22.

Duong

H. T.

(2021). Applying the integrative model to predict intention to use corporal punishment among low-income parents. Health Education & Behavior, 50(2), 250–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981211052881

23.

Duong

H. T.

(2022). Childhood experiences and attitudes toward corporal punishment: The mediating role of perceived efficacy of alternative discipline strategies among low-income Black, Hispanic, and White parents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(19–20), 18266–18290. https://journals-sagepub-com.web.bisu.edu.cn/doi/10.1177/08862605211035879

24.

Duong

H. T.

Monahan

J. L.

Kollar

L. M. M.

Klevens

(2021). Identifying knowledge, self-efficacy and response efficacy of alternative discipline strategies among low-income Black, Latino and White parents. Health Education Research, 36(2), 192–205. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyaa053

25.

Duong

H. T.

Monahan

J. L.

Mercer Kollar

L. M.

Klevens

(2022). Examining sources of social norms supporting child corporal punishment among low-income Black, Latino, and White parents. Health Communication, 37(11), 1413–1422. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1895418

26.

Duong

H. T.

Sirohi

(2023). Where do perceived norms supporting child corporal punishment come from? A study of low-income parents. Health Communication, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2023.2193754

27.

Durrant

Ensom

(2012). Physical punishment of children: Lessons from 20 years of research. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 184(12), 1373–1377. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.101314

28.

Edwards

J. R.

Lambert

L. S.

(2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.12.1.1

29.

Fauchier

Straus

M. A.

(2010). Psychometric properties of the Adult-Recall form of the Dimensions of Discipline Inventory. University of New Hampshire, Family Research Laboratory. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.365.7063&rep=rep1&type=pdf

30.

Ferguson

C. J.

(2013). Spanking, corporal punishment and negative long-term outcomes: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(1), 196–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2012.11.002

31.

Finzi-Dottan

Harel

(2014). Parents’ potential for child abuse: An intergenerational perspective. Journal of Family Violence, 29(4), 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-014-9592-7

32.

Fishbein

(2008). A reasoned action approach to health promotion. Medical Decision Making, 28(6), 834–844.

33.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychological Press.

34.

Fishbein

Cappella

J. N.

(2006). The role of theory in developing effective health communications. Journal of Communication, 56(suppl_1), S1–S17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00280.x

35.

Fishbein

Yzer

M. C.

(2003). Using theory to design effective health behavior interventions. Communication Theory, 13(2), 164–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2003.tb00287.x

36.

Fleckman

J. M.

Taylor

C. A.

Theall

K. P.

Andrinopoulos

(2019). The association between perceived injunctive norms toward corporal punishment, parenting support, and risk for child physical abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 88, 246–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.11.023

37.

Fleming

T. C.

Borrego

(2019). Preliminary support for the theory of planned behavior in pre-parent discipline intentions. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28, 1105–1115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01331-w

38.

Fontes

L. A.

(2005). Child abuse and culture: Working with diverse families. Guilford Press.

39.

Fortson

B. L.

Klevens

Merrick

M. T.

Gilbert

L. K.

Alexander

S. P.

(2016). Preventing child abuse and neglect: A technical package for policy, norm, and programmatic activities. Center for Disease Control.

40.

Gagné

M. H.

Tourigny

Joly

Pouliot-Lapointe

(2007). Predictors of adult attitudes toward corporal punishment of children. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22(10), 1285–1304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260507304550

41.

Gershoff

E. T.

Goodman

G. S.

Miller-Perrin

C. L.

Holden

G. W.

Jackson

Kazdin

A. E.

(2018). The strength of the causal evidence against physical punishment of children and its implications for parents, psychologists, and policymakers. American Psychologist, 73(5), 626–638. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000327

42.

Gershoff

E. T.

Lansford

J. E.

Sexton

H. R.

Davis-Kean

Sameroff

A. J.

(2012). Longitudinal links between spanking and children’s externalizing behaviors in a national sample of White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian American families: Spanking and externalizing behavior. Child Development, 83(3), 838–843. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01732.x

43.

Gershoff

E. T.

Lee

S. J.

Durrant

J. E.

(2017). Promising intervention strategies to reduce parents’ use of physical punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 71, 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.01.017

44.

Hair

J. F.

Jr. Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

(2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education

45.

Hayes

A. F.

(2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.

46.

Holden

G. W.

(2020). Why do parents hit their children? From cultural to unconscious determinants. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 73(1), 10–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00797308.2020.1690858

47.

Holden

G. W.

Brown

A. S.

Baldwin

A. S.

Croft Caderao

(2014). Research findings can change attitudes about corporal punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38(5), 902–908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.013

48.

Holden

G. W.

(2001). Attitudes toward spanking (ATS). In Touliatos

Perlmutter

B. R.

Holden

G. W.

(Eds.), Handbook of family measurement techniques (p. 209). SAGE.

49.

L. T.

Bentler

P. M.

(1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

50.

Klevens

Kollar

L. M.

Rizzo

O’Shea

Nguyen

Roby

(2019). Commonalities and differences in social norms related to corporal punishment among Black, Latino and White parents. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 36(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-018-0591-z

51.

MacKenzie

M. J.

Nicklas

Brooks-Gunn

Waldfogel

(2011). Who spanks infants and toddlers? Evidence from the fragile families and child well-being study. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 1364–1373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.04.007

52.

Magariño

L. S.

Evans

M. C.

Duong

J. B.

Villodas

M. T.

(2021). Racial/ethnic group differences in parenting attitudes among at-risk emerging adults: The roles of adversity, relationship quality, and caregiver involvement and attitudes. Child Abuse & Neglect, 111, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104810

53.

Mehlhausen-Hassoen

(2021). Gender-specific differences in corporal punishment and children’s perceptions of their mothers’ and fathers’ parenting. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(15–16), NP8176–NP8199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519842172

54.

Mogro-Wilson

Loomis

Coman

Fifield

(2019). African-American, Puerto-Rican, and other Hispanic fathers’ differential responses to a parenting intervention. Social Work in Public Health, 34(7), 583–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/19371918.2019.1635946

55.

Muller

R. T.

Hunter

J. E.

Stollak

(1995). The intergenerational transmission of corporal punishment: A comparison of social learning and temperament models. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19(11), 1323–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/0145-2134(95)00103-F

56.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(1997). Mplus 8.4 user’s manual. Muthén & Muthén.

57.

Niu

Liu

Wang

(2018). Intergenerational transmission of harsh discipline: The moderating role of parenting stress and parent gender. Child Abuse & Neglect, 79, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.01.017

58.

Reich

S. M.

Penner

E. K.

Duncan

G. J.

Auger

(2012). Using baby books to change new mothers’ attitudes about corporal punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 36(2), 108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2011.09.017

59.

Paschall

M. J.

Ringwalt

C. L.

Flewelling

R. L.

(2003). Effects of parenting, father absence, and affiliation with delinquent peers on delinquent behavior among African-American male adolescents. Adolescence, 38(149), 15–34.

60.

Payne

B. K.

Hannay

J. W.

(2021). Implicit bias reflects systemic racism. Trends in cognitive sciences, 25(11), 927–936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.08.001

61.

Pinderhughes

E. E.

Dodge

K. A.

Bates

J. E.

Pettit

G. S.

Zelli

(2000). Discipline responses: Influences of parents’ socioeconomic status, ethnicity, beliefs about parenting, stress, and cognitive-emotional processes. Journal of Family Psychology, 14(3), 380–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.14.3.380

62.

Rodriguez

C. M.

Lee

S. J.

Ward

K. P.

(2021). Underlying mechanisms for racial disparities in parent-child physical and psychological aggression and child abuse risk. Child Abuse & Neglect, 117, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105089

63.

Rodriguez

C. M.

Silvia

P. J.

Gonzalez

Christl

M. E.

(2018). Disentangling the cycle: Potential mediators and moderators in the intergenerational transmission of parent–child aggression. Child Maltreatment, 23(3), 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/107755951876757

64.

Rodriguez

C. M.

Wittig

S. M. O.

Silvia

P. J.

(2020). Refining social-information processing theory: Predicting maternal and paternal parent-child aggression risk longitudinally. Child Abuse & Neglect, 107, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104563

65.

Simons

R. L.

Beaman

Conger

R. D.

Chao

(1993). Childhood experience, conceptions of parenting, and attitudes of spouse as determinants of parental behavior. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 55(1), 91–106. https://doi.org/10.2307/352961

66.

Socolar

R. R. S.

(1997). A classification scheme for discipline: Type, mode of administration, context. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2(4), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(97)00021-9

67.

Straus

M. A.

(2001). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American families and its effects on children. Transaction Publishers.

68.

Straus

M. A.

Fauchier

(2007). Manual for the dimensions of discipline inventory. University of New Hampshire.

69.

Toure

Ramos

A. K.

(2019). Assessing racial and ethnic differences in attitudes toward the use of physical discipline in parenting: A mixed-methods approach. Journal of Social Service Research, 45(4), 455–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2018.1480570

70.

Taylor

C. A.

Hamvas

Paris

(2011). Perceived instrumentality and normativeness of corporal punishment use among Black mothers. Family Relations, 60(1), 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00633.x

71.

Taylor

C. A.

Hamvas

Rice

Newman

D. L.

DeJong

(2011). Perceived social norms, expectations, and attitudes toward corporal punishment among an urban community sample of parents. Journal of Urban Health, 88(2), 254–269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-011-9548-7

72.

Taylor

C. A.

McKasson

Hoy

DeJong

(2017). Parents’ primary professional sources of parenting advice moderate predictors of parental attitudes toward corporal punishment. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(2), 652–663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016-0586-3

73.

Thomas

K. A.

Dettlaff

A. J.

(2011). African American families and the role of physical discipline: Witnessing the past in the present. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 21(8), 963–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2011.588537

74.

Walker

C. S.

Stearns

McKinney

(2018). Effect of parental corporal punishment on endorsement of its use: Moderated mediation by parent gender and attitudes toward corporal punishment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(13–14), 6745–6768. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518819878

75.

Wang

Niu

Liu

(2021). Intergenerational transmission of corporal punishment: The independent and interactive moderating role of children’s negative affectivity and effortful control. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(9–10), NP4588–NP4610. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518794513

76.

Wekerle

Wolfe

D. A.

Cohen

J. A.

Bromberg

D. S.

Murray

(2019). Childhood maltreatment (2nd ed.). Hogrefe Publishing.

77.

Widom

C. S.

Wilson

H. W.

(2015). Intergenerational transmission of violence. In Lindert

Levav

(Eds.), Violence and mental health (pp. 27–45). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8999-8_2

78.

Witte

(1992). Putting the fear back into fear appeals: The extended parallel process model. Communication Monographs, 59(4), 329–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759209376276

79.

Wolf

J. P.

Kepple

N. J.

(2019). Individual-and county-level religious participation, corporal punishment, and physical abuse of children: An exploratory study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 34(19), 3983–3994. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516674197