Investment Analysis2182020Letter of IntentMemorandum of Und

Investment Analysis
2/18/2020
Letter of Intent/Memorandum of Understanding Elements
1. Local economic & social impact
· Sports organizations generate revenues from enthusiastic and
supporting fans. It is crucial for a sports organization to
establish local support before constructing a sports
facility/stadium. In return, a well-designed stadium will benefit
the city-county by boosting its local economy and increasing the
quality of life for its local citizens.
· Economic Impact: Increases the city’s media exposure, attracts
more tourists to the city and thereby increases the city’s tax
revenue. It also benefits local businesses by attracting more
customers on the event day
· Social Impact: Gives fans a sense of belonging, generates
pride
2. Stadium Site / Location
· Site selection is an important consideration for a new stadium
project. Organizations must evaluate their unique market and
establish its site requirements.
· Site acquisition: Organization and city must agree on a proper
site acquisition plan. A privately financed project such as the
Oakland Athletics’ Coliseum, purchases its stadium site from
the county. Whereas a publicly financed project such as the
Broward County Civic Arena may have a designated stadium
site recommended by the city-county (Florida Panthers LOI 12)
3. Stadium Design
· New stadiums should be designed to satisfy their unique
market needs. The design should also support the main tenant’s
business operation while accommodating other tenants
· Seating: appropriate seating number to maximize ticket
revenue. Broward County Civic Arena has 21,000 seats to
accommodate baseball fans (Florida Panthers LOI 3) while the
Eagles designed near 70,000 seats for football games (Eagles

Lease Terms 1)
· Parking: if stadium located away from the city, parking spaces
need to be designed
· Other: amenities, restroom, social areas, shop, and restaurants
also need to be considered
4. Stadium Construction and Completion date
· The sports organization and city must have a mutual
agreement on the roles and responsibilities in the stadium
construction process. City county often contract with a third-
party company to serve as “construction manager” to pursuant
to the CM agreement and manage the construction process
(Atlanta Braves Cobb County MOU 5)
· Completion deadline: it is crucial for all parties to finish the
construction process prior to the deadline/ beginning of the
season. Any delay will cause significant revenue loss
5. Project Funding
· It is fundamental for an organization to develop a funding plan
for the new stadium. The project funding plan should include
the estimated cost of construction, as well as parties’
contribution agreement. For instance, the city of Philadelphia
agreed to cover the new Eagle’s stadium’s site acquisition and
construction cost as well as a part of the costs of demolition of
existing buildings. While the Eagles are responsible for the rest
of the demolition, plus the basic stadium elements costs and
environmental remediation cost (Eagles Lease Terms 3)
6. Ownership
· Most publicly funded stadiums such as the Broward County
Civic Arena are owned by the city-county, while other privily
funded stadiums are owned by the team/organization. Different
ownership structure provides different opportunities and threat
· Media Rights / Naming rights ownership: both being a large
portion of the revenue. Stadium and tenants must establish
media and stadium naming rights agreement
· Intellectual Property ownership: stadium and tenants must also
agree on an Intellectual Property License Agreement, which
manages tenant’s rights to use the stadium’s intellectual

properties in their marketing program. For instance, the Georgia
World Congress Center Authority entered into an IP license
agreement, which granted the Atlanta Falcons the right to use
Mercedes Benz Stadium’s trademarks and trade names in their
marketing programs. The agreement also restricts GWCCA from
using the Falcons image on any other GWCCA campus
buildings (Atlanta New Stadium Project 23)
7. License Agreement
· Depending on the ownership structure, sports organizations
might be required to acquire the license to operate in their
stadium. For instance, the Florida Panthers pays the county five
percent of its ticket sales from general seating, in order to play
in the publicly funded stadium (Florida Panthers LOI 5)
· Scheduling of event: tenants must communicate their event
dates with the stadium in advance so there is no concurring
event on the same date. Booking procedures should be
established as well as a priority booking policy for the main
tenant (Atlanta New Stadium Project 10)
8. Operation Management
· Both the organization and the stadium must reach an
agreement on the responsibilities of the facility’s daily
operation. Organizations may use a third-party Management
company to facilitate stadium operations. All parties should
establish a management agreement, and the management
company must fulfill all tenant’s operational goals and
objectives
· O&M, R&R responsibilities: Organizations and facilities must
have a mutual agreement on the responsibilities of the facility’s
future operational maintenance and repair/ replacement. For
example, the Georgia World Congress Center Authority
cooperates with the Falcons with its stadium maintenance and
covers all landscaping maintenance costs. However, each year,
the GWCCA requires the Falcons to submit its maintenance and
capital improvement plan before the next season (Atlanta New
Stadium Project 19)
9. Financial Terms

· Having an operating expense budget is important because
organizations must minimize expenses in order to maximize
profit. Organizations must efficiently allocate their budget
between employee salary, field maintenance, equipment
purchases, administrative services and taxes. (Florida Panthers
A-2) Some operating expenses may be covered by the stadium.
For instance, the GWCCA will provide the Atlanta Falcons an
annual budget for traffic allocation services (Atlanta New
Stadium Project 14)
· Organizations also need to consider how the operating revenue
is being distributed. Such as ticket revenue, merchandise sales,
food and beverage sales. Teams might need to pay a certain
percentage of their revenue to the county issued revenue bonds.
10. Development strategy Agreement
· In order to maximize a sporting facility’s usage, it is
important that a stadium and its local county, to share the same
commitment for a long-term growth strategy. Teams such as the
Atlanta Falcons might be required to enter into a Non-
Relocation Agreement with its stadium. In such cases, the teams
are restricted to relocate, unless a material breach has been
made by the stadium operator (Atlanta New Stadium Project 9)

Citation
Florida Panthers and Broward County, FL for Broward County
Civic Arena 1996.
Atlanta New Stadium Project 2012.
Eagles Lease Terms 2000.
“8 Things to Consider When Building a New Sports Complex.”
Earth Networks, 8 Nov. 2019, www.earthnetworks.com/blog/8-
things-consider-building-a-new-sports-complex/.
1
3
Title of PaperStudent NameCourse/Number
Due Date
Faculty Name
Detailed expectations for a 100-299 Level Course(remove this
line)Title of Paper
Triple click your mouse anywhere in this paragraph to replace
this text with your introduction. Often the most important
paragraph in the entire essay, the introduction grabs the reader's
attention—sometimes a difficult task for academic writing.
When writing an introduction, some approaches are best
avoided. Avoid starting sentences with “The purpose of this
essay is . . .” or “In this essay I will . . .” or any similar flat
announcement of your intention or topic. Read more: Center for
Writing Excellence>Tutorials and Guides>Essay
Development>Guidelines for Writing Academic Essays. Level
One Heading

Replace the level one heading with the words for your heading.
The heading must be in bold font. Headings help your audience
track the sub-topics discussed in the body of the essay or report.
Begin a new heading for each sub-topic.
Be sure to indent the first line of each paragraph between five
and seven spaces by pressing the Tab key one time on the
keyboard. In addition, remember to double space the entire
paper using the double space functionality in Word. This
template is already formatted for double spacing. Read more:
Center for Writing Excellence>Tutorials and Guides>Software
Tutorials and Guides>Formatting Tutorial for APA.
In addition, keep in mind an academic essay should contain at
least five paragraphs, which includes the introduction
(introductory paragraph), the body (which is generally at least 3
paragraphs), and the conclusion (generally one paragraph). Most
well-developed paragraphs contain at least 3-5 sentences, one of
which is the topic sentence. Limit each body paragraph to one
main idea.
Conclusion
The closing paragraph is designed to bring the reader to your
way of thinking if you are writing a persuasive essay, to
understand relationships if you are writing a
comparison/contrast essay, or simply to value the information
you provide in an informational essay. The closing paragraph
summarizes the key points from the supporting paragraphs
without introducing any new information.
References
This is a hanging indent. To keep the hanging indent format,
triple click your mouse on this line of text and replace the
information with your reference entry. You can use the
Reference and Citation Examples (Center for Writing
Excellence>Tutorials and Guides>Reference and Citation
Examples) to help format your source information into a
reference entry.

The reference page always begins on the top of the next page
after the conclusion.
Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, Vol. 2, No. 2,
1999
Corporal Punishment by American Parents: National Data
on Prevalence, Chronicity, Severity, and Duration, in
Relation to Child and Family Characteristics
Murray A. Straus1,2 and Julie H. Stewart1
We present data on corporal punishment (CP) by a nationally
representative sample of 991
American parents interviewed in 1995. Six types of CP were
examined: slaps on the hand
or leg, spanking on the buttocks, pinching, shaking, hitting on
the buttocks with a belt or
paddle, and slapping in the face. The overall prevalence rate
(the percentage of parents
using any of these types of CP during the previous year) was
35% for infants and reached
a peak of 94% at ages 3 and 4. Despite rapid decline after age 5,
just over half of American
parents hit children at age 12, a third at age 14, and 13% at age
17. Analysis of chronicity
found that parents who hit teenage children did so an average of
about six times during the
year. Severity, as measured by hitting the child with a belt or
paddle, was greatest for children
age 5-12 (28% of such children). CP was more prevalent among
African American and low
socioeconomic status parents, in the South, for boys, and by
mothers. The pervasiveness of

CP reported in this article, and the harmful side effects of CP
shown by recent longitudinal
research, indicates a need for psychology and sociology
textbooks to reverse the current
tendency to almost ignore CP and instead treat it as a major
aspect of the socialization
experience of American children; and for developmental
psychologists to be cognizant of
the likelihood that parents are using CP far more often than
even advocates of CP recommend,
and to inform parents about the risks involved.
INTRODUCTION
Evidence indicating that almost all American
parents use spanking and other legal forms of corpo-
ral punishment (CP) on toddlers has been available
for many years. Sears, Maccoby, and Levin (1957),
for example, found that 99% of the children they
studied experienced CP at least occasionally. Straus
(1983) found a 95% rate for toddlers, and Bryan and
Freed (1982) found that 95% of a sample of commu-
nity college students had experienced CP. Numerous
other studies (e.g., Giles-Sims, Straus, & Sugarman,
1Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire,
Durham, New Hampshire, 03824.
2Address all correspondence to Murray A. Straus, Family
Research
Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hamp-
shire 03824; e-mail: [email protected]
1995; Goodenough, 1931/1975; Holden, Coleman, &
Schmidt, 1995; Straus, 1994a; Wauchope & Straus,
1990) also show extremely high rates of CP. CP there-
fore appears to be a near universal aspect of the

socialization experience of American children, al-
though to widely varying degrees in individual cases.
There is also increasing evidence that, even when
done by loving and supportive parents, CP is associ-
ated with an increased risk of unwanted later effects
such as aggression and depression as an adult (Straus,
1994a; Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997;
Thompson, In press).
Despite the high prevalence rates and the evi-
dence suggesting harmful side effects, there is also
evidence that this pervasive aspect of the socialization
of American children is either not perceived or ig-
nored. One indication is the extremely limited cover-
age of CP revealed by a content analysis of 10 widely
55
1096-4037/99/0600.0055$16.00/0 © 1999 Plenum Publishing
Corporation
KEY WORDS: Punishment; physical; corporal; spanking;
parent; age; infant; gender; SES; ethnic; region.
56 Straus and Stewart
used textbooks in child development published be-
tween 1985 and 1989 (Straus, 1994a). For this article,
the analysis was repeated for books published be-
tween 1992 and 1996. The results in Table I shows
little change from the 1980s to the 1990s. The omis-
sion of information on CP in child development text-
books is unfortunate because discipline problems are
frequently the focus of clinical child psychology and,
as indicated above, CP is a widely used disciplinary

technique. Consequently, the background under-
standing the nature and extent of CP provided by
the research reported in this article may be helpful
in clinical practice.
Among the books for the period 1992-1996, only
a third had entries in the index for corporal punish-
ment, spanking, physical punishment, or anything on
CP under subheads such as discipline or punishment.
Although page by page scanning the text located
material on corporal punishment in 9 of the 11 books,
these 9 books devoted an average of only three tenths
of a page to CP.
Because, as noted earlier, data on CP has been
available for many years, the absence of information
on CP in child development textbooks cannot be
attributed to lack of developmentally relevant data.
Straus (1994a) has suggested methodological and so-
ciocultural factors to explain the neglect of a nearly
universal aspect of the socialization of American chil -
dren. Whatever the reason, current information is
needed because the last few years have been a period
in which public endorsement of CP declined sharply
(Straus & Mathur, 1996). There has also been a recent
surge of professional debate about the potential
harmful effects of CP, as evidenced by special issues
of Pediatrics in 1996; Psychological Inquiry, Archives
of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, and Aggression
and Violent Behavior in 1997; and by the 1998 policy
statement on CP by the American Academy of Pedi-
atrics.
Deep value commitments underlie the debate on
the appropriateness of CP (Friedman & Schonberg,

1996; Straus, 1994a). Readers of this article therefore
need to be aware that our position differs from the
standard assumptions of American culture—that CP
is sometimes necessary, and if done in moderation
by loving parents, is harmless. This tenet of American
culture is shared by at least two thirds of Americans
(Straus & Mathur, 1996), including the majority of
pediatricians (White, 1993) and clinical psychologists
(Anderson & Anderson, 1976). Our view, however,
is that parents should never use CP because a growing
body of research evidence shows that other disciplin-
ary strategies are just as effective and do not involve
the risk of escalation into physical abuse (Straus,
1994a) or of subsequent psychological problems for
children and adults (Straus, 1994b; Straus & Paschall,
1998; Straus et al., 1997).
Regardless of whether one accepts or rejects use
of CP, we suggest that clinical child psychology can
benefit from a background understanding of the ex-
tent to which parents use this mode of discipline with
children of different ages. Consequently, the purpose
of this article is to make available information on the
use of CP by a nationally representative sample of
American parents in 1995 for each year of life from
birth through 17, and other age categories. It also
provides information on the prevalence of six specific
acts of CP that vary in severity, on the chronicity of
CP (how often CP was used), and on the duration
of CP (the number of years until CP ceases). In addi-
tion, we examine the extent to which CP varies by
seven other characteristics of the children and the
families.
The information on the extent to which CP dif-
fers according to these characteristics of children and

families can help to understand the social structural
determinants of CP and can also have practical value
because, as indicated above, there is a growing pro-
fessional interest in helping parents shift from CP to
nonviolent forms of discipline. Such programs need
to be guided by empirical data on the extent to which
CP is prevalent at different ages and in different
sectors of the population. For example, African
American parents, and low education parents of all
ethnic groups, are more likely to approve of and use
CP (Alvy, 1987; Deater-Deckard, Dodge, Bates, &
Pettit, 1996; Giles-Sims et al., 1995). Consequently,
parent education intended to reduce CP may need
to be structured to reflect the culture of these groups.
Table I. Treatment of Corporal Punishment in Child
Development
Textbooks in 1980s and 1990s
CP in Index (%)
Range of pages on CP
Mean no. of pages on CP
% of pages on CP
Advised avoiding CP if
possible (%)
Advised to never use CP (%)
Year of publication
1985-1989
(n = 10)
20
1 sentence

to 4
pages
0.4
0.0 to 0.3
10
0
1992-1996
(n = 11)
36
1 sentence
to 0.8
pages
0.3
0.0 to 0.08
27
9
Corporal Punishment 57
If, in recent years, fathers have taken on additional
child care responsibilities, the additional effort
needed to include fathers in parent education pro-
grams may be even more important than previously.
Because this article is intended primarily to ex-
plore and describe rather than to test formal hypothe-

ses, each topic in the Results section is introduced by
a brief description of findings from previous research.
METHOD
Sample
The data were obtained from a survey by the
Gallup Organization (1995). The survey was con-
ducted by telephone in August and September 1995.
The telephone numbers were selected by a random-
digit stratified probability design. A random proce-
dure was used to provide representation of both listed
and unlisted numbers. These methods are designed
to produce, with proper weighting, and unbiased
probability sample of telephone households in the
continental United States, which includes 94% of all
households. Among households that met the eligibil-
ity criterion (one or more children under 18 living
there), the participation rate was 81%. A total of 991
interviews were completed. In two-parent house-
holds, because of budget limitations, one parent was
randomly selected for the interview. In multichild
households, one child was randomly identified, and a
parent of that child interviewed, and all data reported
pertain to the selected child. See Gallup Organization
(1995) for more detailed sampling information. A
telephone sample obviously excludes those without
telephones, which tends to be low socioeconomic sta-
tus (SES) persons. However, face-to-face interview
surveys also have great difficulty locating and en-
listing the participation of such persons, and there is
considerable evidence that properly conducted tele-
phone surveys obtain a higher participation rate and
are usually more representative than face-to-face in-
terview surveys (Bermack, 1989; Groves et al., 1988;

Wells, Burnam, Leake, & Robbins, 1988).
Sample Characteristics and Weighting
The division between boys and girls in this sam-
ple was almost equal (49% girls). The ethnic compo-
sition was 81% Euro-American, 12% African
American, and 7% other ethnic groups (Hispanic
Americans, Native Americans, and Asian Ameri-
cans). The mean age of the parents interviewed was
36.8 years. More mothers than fathers were inter-
viewed (66% of the sample), partly because the sam-
ple included single parents who are predominantly
mothers. Fifty-two percent of the parents were mar-
ried, 15% remarried, 20% divorced, 8% never mar-
ried, and 4% were cohabiting. The referent children
ranged in age from infants to age 17, with a mean
age of 8.4 years. Households with college-educated
parents were overrepresented (34 vs. 23% in the Cen-
sus) and those with less than a high school education
were underrepresented (8 vs. 14% in the Census). In
all analyses, data were weighted to make the data
reflect U.S. Census statistics with regard to the gender
of the respondent, child's age, ethnic group, region
of the country, and parent's education. This involved
an unproven assumption that the replies of nonsur-
veyed members of underrepresented groups would
be similar to those who were surveyed.
Definition and Measurement of
Corporal Punishment
The definition of CP which guided this research
is "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 of the child's
behavior" (Straus, 1994a, p. 4). This corresponds in
practice to the legal definition of CP in all states of
the U.S., which is in the form of an exemption from
the crime of assault for parents who use physical
force for purposes of correction and control (see
Straus, 1994a, for a discussion and illustrative
statutes).
The Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scales
(CTSPC; Straus, Hamby, Finkelhor, Moore, &
Runyan, 1998) was used to obtain the data on CP.
This version of the CTS includes six items that fall
within the range of legal CP. It asks parents how
often each of these acts occurred in the previous 12
months. The response categories were never, once,
twice, 3-5 times, 6-10 times, 11-20 times, and more
than 20 times.
Prevalence of CP. The overall prevalence statis-
tics in this article are based on whether the parent
reported one or more instances of one or more of
the following acts in the previous 12 months. Thus,
multiple acts could have occurred in a particular CP
episode. (See Straus et al., 1998, for the exact ques-
tion wording.)
Spanked on the bottom with your bare hand
Slapped on the hand, arm, or leg
Pinched
Shook (for children age 3 and over only)
Hit on the bottom with something like a belt, hair-

brush, a stick or some other hard object
Slapped on the face or head or ears
Chronicity. For the parents who used CP, it is
also important to know how often they engaged in
that disciplinary tactic. A chronicity measure was
therefore computed for each parent who reported
using CP by summing the frequency of each of the
six acts in the CP scale. The chronicity of the specific
acts are also reported. See Straus (1998) and Straus
et al. (1998) for an explanation of the need to measure
prevalence and chronicity separately.
Severity. Severity of CP can be measured in a
number of ways (Straus, 1998). The severity of CP
was based on a judgment concerning the risk of injury
and degree of normative acceptance made by a five-
person team that included a pediatrician specializing
in child abuse, a clinical psychologist, two sociologists
specializing in research on the family, and a political
scientist specializing in public opinion research
(Straus et al., 1998). Three acts were judged to carry
a higher risk and be less widely accepted, and were
classified as severe CP (slap on face or head, hit with
belt or hard object, pinched) and two as less severe
(spanked and slapped on the hand or leg). Shaking
was considered separately because of the extreme
danger if done to infants.
Duration. Because this is a cross-sectional study,
an estimate of the median duration can only be in-
ferred from the age-specific prevalence statistics. If
for example, the percentage hit at ages 11, 12, 13,
and 14 were 61, 52, 45, and 32%, respectively, we
would infer that the median duration is about 12
years. This inference depends on the assumption that

parents who used CP at age 12 were doing so in
previous years.
One-Year Reporting. A short reporting period,
such the previous week, results in a much higher
estimate of chronicity, but a low prevalence rate be-
cause not every parent who uses CP did so in the
previous week. This is particularly the case with older
children. Conversely, a 1-year reporting period re-
sults in a higher prevalence rate, but the difficulty of
recalling the number of instances produces an under-
estimate of chronicity. To deal with this problem, the
questions need to be repeated for the previous week
and previous year (Straus, 1998). However, budget
limitations restricted this study to the previous year
as the reporting period. Consequently, the chronicity
data in this article must be regarded as minimum esti-
mates.
Measures of Independent Variables
Age of Child. The analyses of age differences in
CP used 1-year age intervals (from under 1 through
17). The analysis of the interaction of age with the
other independent variables grouped the children
into the following six categories in order to have
enough cases per cell to be statistically reliable: In-
fants (0-1), toddlers (age 2-4), early primary school
(age 5-8), later primary school (age 9-12), and teens
(age 13-17).
Age of Parent. Three age categories were used:
18-29, 30-39, and 40 and over.
Single Parent. This variable indicates whether

the child was living with only one parent, versus all
other living arrangements.
Socioeconomic Status. SES was measured by a
factor score obtained by a principle components anal -
ysis of the respondent's education and income. The
factor score was then coded into quintiles in order
to have enough cases per cell for the ANOVA.
Ethnic Group. Ethnic group was included in the
analysis with three categories. Euro-Americans were
coded as 1, African Americans as 2, and all other
ethnic groups as 3 because there were not sufficient
cases to make finer differentiations.
Gender of Parent and Child. Girls were coded
as 1 and boys as 0. Mothers were coded as 1 and
fathers as 0.
Region. The Northeast was coded as 1, the Mid-
west as 2, the South as 3, and the West as 4.
Data Analysis
Consistent with the emphasis on describing the
prevalence of CP rather than testing a theoretical
model, ANOVA was used as the main mode of analy-
sis because it provides the observed mean CP for
children of each age and each category of the other
independent variables, and for the interactions of
these variables. The ANOVAs were computed using
the "regression approach" option in SPSS/PC,
namely, "All effects are assessed simultaneously,
with each effect adjusted for all other effects in the
model" (Norusis, 1992, p. 257). Thus, the test for
each independent variable controls for the other in-

dependent variables, and the means were adjusted
to control for the other independent variables.
The N for the child age trend analyses of preva-
lence is 991. The analysis of the chronicity of CP are
based on the 609 cases where CP was used at least
once. For the ANOVA relating differences in charac-
teristics of the family and child to the prevalence of
CP, the analyses of prevalence are based on 978 cases.
The ANOVA for chronicity is based on 602 cases.
The number of cases for each category of the in-
dependent variables are given in Table II. The
ANOVAs were restricted to main effects and two-
way interactions because higher order interactions
would have resulted in empty cells and singular vari-
ance-covariance matrices.
recently become a focus of attention. Previous re-
search indicates that CP increases from infancy to
age 2, stays about the same for ages 3 through 5, and
decreases steadily from age 5 through 17 (Bachman,
1967; Straus, 1991,1994a; Wauchope & Straus, 1990),
and that pattern was expected to hold for this sample.
Age and Prevalence of Corporal Punishment
In Figure 1 the dashed line is for the observed
means and the solid line plots the moving average.
(The moving average controls for random fluctua-
tions by combining the mean of the observed mean
for each age and the age just below and just above.)

Figure 1 shows that just over a third of infants (chil-
dren under 1 year of age) were hit by their parents.
The rate then rises to a peak at ages 4 and 5, whenRESULTS
Age of Child and Corporal Punishment
The age of the child is uniquely important for
understanding the place of CP in the socialization of
American children. This is because of the tremendous
variation by age and, as indicated earlier, because
the age at which CP is considered appropriate has
Fig. 1. Prevalence of corporal punishment by child's age.
Table II. Number of Cases in Categories Used for ANOVAs
Characteristic and category
Age of child
0-1
2-4
5-8
9-12
13-17
Gender of child
Male
Female
Gender of respondent
Male
Female
Age of respondent
18-29
30-39

40+
SES quintiles
1 Low
2
3
4
5 High
Ethnic group
White
Black
Other
Single parent
Yes
No
Region
NE
Midwest
South
West
No. of cases
Table III
92
190
230
228
246
503
483

333
653
224
438
323
203
139
228
226
189
817
125
44
324
662
190
252
328
215
Table IV
43
166
191
131
70
320
282

181
420
171
285
146
148
81
145
126
101
480
97
25
207
395
101
159
223
119
94% of parents said that, during the previous 12
months, they had used one or more of the types of
CP included in the CP scale. From there on, the rate
declined steadily to age 17. However, it is important
to note that as late as age 13, over 40% of parents

used CP as a disciplinary technique.
Age and Chronicity of Corporal Punishment
Age Differences and Severity of
Corporal Punishment
Table III gives the percentage of parents who
used ordinary CP and more severe types of CP, and
also two other disciplinary tactics. It uses age catego-
ries rather than 1-year age intervals because, as ex-
plained in the Method section, single-year categories
produced too many empty cells for the more rarely
occurring types of CP.
Comparing parts A and B of Table III reveals
a developmental pattern. The milder forms of CP in
Part A (spanking and slapping) were used most often
with toddlers (ages 2-4). The more severe and less
culturally approved forms of CP (see Method section)
in Part B of Table III were most prevalent in middle
childhood (ages 5-12 in Table III). Teenagers had
the lowest prevalence rates, but in our opinion were
still remarkably high.
Hitting a child on the bottom with objects such as
a belt, hairbrush, or stick was, presumably, extremely
common as recently as the 1940s. Even as recently
as the 1970s, two thirds of a random sample of the
population of Texas believed that hitting a child with
such objects is acceptable (Teske & Parker, 1983).
Table III indicates that actual use of belts and paddles
has also not disappeared. More than one in four
American parents reported having used such objects
on a child age 5 to 12 in 1995.

The least frequent forms of CP were slapping
on the face, head, or ears and pinching. Except for
infants, from 3 to 8% of children of all age groups
experienced these two forms of CP.
Part C of Table III includes two important
disciplinary tactics that do not fit neatly into the
categories "minor" and "severe" CP. The first of
these, shaking a child, can cause brain injury or
death to children under 2. So it is an indicator of
child abuse rather than CP for children that young.
Although 4.3% of this national sample reported
shaking a child that was under 2, none of the cases
of shaking were for infants. On the one hand, this
makes the statistic less ominous. On the other hand,
it makes the rate for the 12- to 23-month-old
children 10.3%. Looking across the Shaking row of
Table III, about 1 of 10 parents of children of all
ages except infants and teens used shaking as a
mode of CP.
The Threatened to Spank row of Table III de-
scribes the prevalence of a tactic that, strictly speak-
ing is a form of verbal aggression, not an act of CP
as previously defined. It was therefore not one of the
Although Figure 1 indicates how many children
were hit at each age, it does not indicate how often
parents hit the children in this study. This information
is given in Figure 2. It refers to those parents who
used CP at least once during the previous year and
gives the mean number of times they reported using
CP. Figure 2 shows that CP was most chronic by
parents of 2-year-old children. They reported using
CP an average of 18 times during the previous year.
The chronicity of CP declined from there on, to a

mean of six times per year by parents of 14-, 15-, and
16-year-old children.
Fig. 2. Chronicity of corporal punishment by child's age.
Table III. Percentage of Parents using Specific Acts of Corporal
Punishment by Age of Child
Type of corporal punishment
A. Ordinary
Spank on bottom with hand
Slap on hand, arm or leg
B. Severe
Hit on bottom with object
Slap on face, head or ears
Pinch
C. Other
Shake
Threatened to spank
Age of child
0-1
31.8
36.4
2.5
0.5

2.8
4.3
22.8
2-4
72.1
63.3
18.1
4.8
2.8
12.8
65.5
5-8
71.2
47.5
28.4
6.9
7.9
10.8
70.7
9-12
43.1
26.9
28.5
2.9

5.1
11.4
55.6
13-17
14.0
16.2
15.6
5.8
2.3
5.7
38.9
F
64.6
28.5
11.3
2.6
2.8
3.0
26.8
P<
.01
.01
.01

.02
.03
.02
.01
items in the CP scale used to obtain the prevalence
rates in Figures 1 to 3. It is included in Table III,
however, because it is a form of verbal aggression
that often leads to the actual use of CP and because
it is so frequent right up through the teen years.
Other Child and Parent Characteristics Associated
with CP
The analyses in this section are based on
ANOVAs using eight independent variables, as de-
scribed in the Method section. The tests of signifi-
cance for each of the independent variables therefore
controlled for the level of all the other variables in
the analysis. The means for each variable in this sec-
tion have been adjusted for the level of the other
variables and therefore describes the net effect of the
variable after controlling for the other independent
variables. The numbers for each category of the vari-
ables are given in Table II.
Age of Parent
Studies of three nationally representative sam-
ples of parents found that the younger the parent,
the greater the prevalence of CP (Day, Peterson, &
McCracken, 1998; Giles-Sims et al., 1995; Straus,

1994a). For the current study, although there is a
tendency for younger parents to be more likely to
use CP, the second row of Table IV shows that the
differences were not significant. However, row 2 of
Table V shows a significant relation of parents' age
to the chronicity of CP. Younger parents (18-29)
used CP an average of 17.1 times during the previous
12 months in comparison to 12.6 times for those
30-39 and 9.1 times for parents over 40. This differ-
ence is not the result of younger parents having
younger children (who, on average, are hit more fre-
quently) because the analysis controlled for the age
of the child.
Socioeconomic Status
Although some studies have found that the
higher the SES, the less use of CP (Giles-Sims et
al., 1995), most have found no important difference
(Erlanger, 1974a, 1974b). The present study found a
significant main effect for SES (Table IV, row 3).
Figure 3 shows that the percentage of parents using
CP was highest among parents in the lowest quintile
of the SES scale, and decreased with increasing SES.
The solid line is for the observed percentage, and the
dotted line gives the percentage after controlling for
the other seven independent variables (age and gen-
der of the parent and the child, the ethnicity of the
child, single parents, and region). Comparing the two
lines shows that controlling for these variables low -
ered the relation of SES to CP, but only slightly.
We also found significant interactions of SES
with age of parent and age of child. The interaction
of SES with age of the parent mainly occurred be-

cause for younger parents the percentage who used
CP was high regardless of SES. Thus the main effect
finding, that the higher the SES, the lower the per-
centage using CP, applies only to the two older age
groups (ages 30 to 39 and 40+).
Ethnic Group
Previous research on ethnic differences in CP is
also contradictory. For example, Straus (1994a)
found no important difference between African
Table IV. Analysis of Variance of Prevalence of Corporal
Punishment (N = 978)
Source of variation
Main effects
Age of child
Age of parent
SES
Ethnicity of child
Gender of child
Gender of parent
Single parent
Region
Two-way interactions
Gender of child X age of child
Gender of child X Gender of parent
Gender of child x Age of parent
Gender of child X SES

Gender of child x Ethnicity of child
Gender of child x Single parent
Gender of child x Region
Age of child X Gender of parent
Age of child x Age of Parent
Age of child x SES
Age of child x Ethnicity of Child
Age of child X Single parent
Age of child x Region
Gender of parent x age of parent
Gender of parent X SES
Gender of parent x ethnicity of child
Gender of parent x single parent
Gender of parent X Region
Age of parent x SES
Age of parent X Ethnicity of child
Age of parent x Single parent
Age of parent x Region
SES X Ethnicity of child
SES X Single parent
SES x Region
Ethnicity of child X single parent
Ethnicity of child X region
Single parent X region
df
4
2
4
2
1
1
1
3

4
1
2
4
2
1
3
4
8
16
8
4
12
2
4
2
1
3
8
4
2
6
8
4
12
2
6
3
Mean square
102762.392
1598.307

5157.449
6434.534
11947.483
6539.097
5132.157
10701.384
2792.791
166.825
1741.532
2614.281
2965.120
388.886
253.075
7003.780
770.383
3830.571
2262.647
2929.269
3919.154
2994.410
3222.397
3137.298
1268.802
648.837
3361.851
599.639
1098.502
2870.937

1111.666
2882.174
2232.964
1851.213
2414.525
2404.452
f
63.407
0.986
3.182
3.970
7.372
4.035
3.167
6.603
1.723
0.103
1.075
1.613
1.830
0.240
0.156
4.322
0.475
2.364
1.396
1.807
2.418
1.848
1.988
1.936
0.783
0.400

2.074
0.370
0.678
1.771
0.686
1.778
1.378
1.142
1.490
1.484
P<
.001
.373
.013
.019
.007
.045
.076
.001
.143
.748
.342
.169

.161
.624
.926
.002
.874
.002
.194
.125
.004
.158
.094
.145
.377
.753
.036
.830
.508
.102

.704
.131
.171
.320
.179
.218
Americans and Euro-Americans, but Day et al.
(1998) found more CP by African American parents,
but only for children age 5 to 11 years; and among
younger children, only for unmarried mothers. On
the other hand, Deater-Deckard et al. (1996) and
Giles-Sims et al. (1995) found more CP by African
American parents.
Row 4 of Table IV shows that for this sample there
was a significant difference between ethnic groups,
even after controlling for seven other variables, includ-
ing SES. Seventy percent of African American parents
reported using CP during the previous year, …
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Associations between childhood experiences
of parental corporal punishment and
neglectful parenting and undergraduate

students’ endorsement of corporal
punishment as an acceptable parenting
strategy
Naomi KitanoID
1,2,3*, Kouichi YoshimasuID
4*, Beverley Anne Yamamoto3,
Yasuhide Nakamura
5
1 Research Center for Community Medicine, Wakayama
Medical University, Wakayama, Japan,
2 Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, Wakayama
Medical University, Wakayama, Japan,
3 Graduate School of Human Sciences, Osaka University, Suita,
Japan, 4 Department of Hygiene, School of
Medicine, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan, 5
Faculty of Nursing and Rehabilitation, Konan
Women’s University, Kobe, Japan
* [email protected] (NK); [email protected] (KY)
Abstract
This study evaluated the effects of childhood experiences of
parental corporal punishment

(CP) and neglectful parenting (NP) on Japanese university
students’ endorsement of paren-
tal CP (EPP) to discipline children, in relation to subjective
happiness (SH). A total of 536
undergraduate students who showed no physical symptoms
completed anonymous paper-
based questionnaires addressing demographic characteristics,
undergraduate classes, and
recent health conditions on SF-8 (PCS, MCS). It was found that
the proportions of partici-
pants who experienced pervasive CP and NP were larger in men
than in women (36.5% vs.
19.4% for CP; 22.1% vs. 9.7% for NP). Multiple regression
analyses (n = 346) revealed that
the CP score was associated with positive EPP (β = 0.310, p <
0.001). Further, students
whose major was nursery education reported significantly lower
level of EPP; however, nei-
ther SH nor good recent health conditions significantly reduced
EPP. The NP score was
inversely associated with the SH score (β = -0.253, p < 0.001)
(n = 346). In conclusion, child-
hood experiences of parental CP may affect adolescents’ views
related to their own parent-
ing. Further investigation using internationally comparable
methodologies, especially in

prospective cohort studies, is warranted, not only in Japan but
also in other Asian countries.
Introduction
The prevention of child maltreatment is one of the most urgent
public health issues worldwide
[1,2]. Recent neurobiological, morphological, genetic, and
epigenetic findings have offered
PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206243
October 26, 2018 1 / 16
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
OPEN ACCESS
Citation: Kitano N, Yoshimasu K, Yamamoto BA,
Nakamura Y (2018) Associations between
childhood experiences of parental corporal
punishment and neglectful parenting and
undergraduate students’ endorsement of corporal

punishment as an acceptable parenting strategy.
PLoS ONE 13(10): e0206243. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0206243
Editor: Neha John-Henderson, Montana State
University, UNITED STATES
Received: June 25, 2018
Accepted: October 9, 2018
Published: October 26, 2018
Copyright: © 2018 Kitano et al. This is an open
access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original
author and source are credited.
Data Availability Statement: There are ethical
restrictions on making data publicly available.
Since the data set of the current study contains
potentially sensitive student information, data

availability is under strict control of the Research
Ethics Committee of the Graduate School of
Human Sciences, Osaka University (email: jinka-
[email protected]).
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6103-4907
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5638-183X
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206243
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1371/journal.pone.
0206243&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2018-10-26
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
mailto:[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]
experimental evidence to support the relationship between child
maltreatment and increased
susceptibility to health impairments later in life [3,4].
Furthermore, many longitudinal cohort

studies have suggested that child maltreatment and adverse
familial environments have nega-
tive effects on long-term health [5–8]. Epidemiological studies
have consistently shown a high
prevalence of mental health problems among children and
adolescents in community popula-
tions [9]. The heterogeneity in individual responses to such
experiences of maltreatment and
emotional abuse is an important predictor of poor mental health
throughout life [10,11], and
this might lead to the perpetuation of child abuse or neglect
between generations. Such inter-
generational transmission of maltreatment has been reported
based on several theoretical
models in Western countries [12–14]. The moderating effects of
cultural factors on the link
between parenting and child outcomes have been inconsistent
[15–17]. Across cultural groups,
more frequent use of corporal punishment is associated with
greater externalizing behaviors in
children [18]. However, previous multicultural studies did not
include Japan, where parenting
styles and discipline tactics are somewhat different compared
with even other East Asian coun-

tries [19], suggesting that Japan has set comparatively high
value on ‘loyalty’ while Korea has
set higher value on ‘piety for their parents’. In Japan, a
dramatic increase in the number of
reported cases of child maltreatment [20] has raised concerns
about not only the health and
welfare of the children most at risk but also the long-term
impacts of corporal punishment
(CP) [21] and neglectful parenting (NP). Therefore, we sought
to identify young people who
experienced childhood parenting problems in a population of
university students without
physical symptoms to explore the effects of such experiences on
young adulthood.
Hence, this study assessed the frequencies of reported parental
CP and/or NP and their
effects on young adults, focusing on their endorsement of CP as
an acceptable parenting strat-
egy and self-reported well-being, such as subjective happiness
(SH). We also examined the
confounding effects of SH and subjective mental and physical
health conditions on the associa-
tion between experiences of CP and/or NP and endorsement of
CP. Those with poor SH or

with bad mental health and experiences of CP and/or NP may
endorse CP. However, consider-
ing the traditional background of home discipline, even those
with good SH might strongly
endorse CP.
We also hypothesized that students who experienced childhood
CP and/or NP would
report lower levels of subjective well-being regardless of their
most recent physical/mental
health status. A previous study has suggested that adolescents’
exposure to maternal negative
affective behavior is associated with adolescents’ subjective
daily well-being [22]. Happiness is
a composite of life satisfaction, coping resources, and positive
emotions [23]. Positive emotions
are a powerful source of growth and change, predicting both
individuals’ judgments about life
and their skills for living well, including recovery from illness
[24,25].
Additionally, studying nursery education may be a possible
factor for the prevention of
maltreatment, which is inversely associated with endorsing CP.
Children exposed to school-
based programs show improvements in protective behaviors and

knowledge as well as increase
disclosure of abuse [26]. A nursery educational course includes
a variety of social sciences
such as psychology, psychiatry, and welfare, including
prevention or coping with child
maltreatment.
As such, the main purpose of this study was to examine the
association between childhood
experiences of parental CP and/or NP and endorsement of CP in
relation to current subjective
well-being in apparently healthy Japanese university students.
Next, to explore whether the
endorsement of CP can be changed by students’ appropriate
recognition, we also examined
whether university students who study nursery education are
less likely to endorse CP as a
suitable parenting practice.
Child abuse and endorsement of corporal punishment
October 26, 2018 2 / 16
Funding: This research was supported by an Osaka
University, Graduate School of Human Sciences

‘Support Program for Improving Graduate School
Education’ grant: ‘Promoting the Use of Human
Science Data in General and Professional
Education’. The funder had no role in study design,
data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or
preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared
that no competing interests exist.
Material and methods
The present study was an exploratory, cross-sectional
investigation targeting undergraduate
students at five universities in Western Japan. It was conducted
from September 2007 to July
2008. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the
Research Ethics Committee of the
Graduate School of Human Sciences, Osaka University.
Completing and returning the anony-
mous questionnaires indicated participants’ tacit informed
consent.

Study participants
Participants were recruited from first- and second-year
undergraduate classes in nursery edu-
cation, health nursing, social welfare, domestic science,
nutrition, and psychosociology. Eligi-
ble students were those studying in the Kansai area who could
be contacted by the first author
(NK), who was the principal investigator, in cooperation with
co-investigators at multiple uni-
versities. A total of 692 students from five universities were
recruited. Valid responses were
received from 536 respondents (104 men and 432 women, valid
response rate: 77.5%). None of
the study participants had any experience in caring for children.
Definitions
In the present study, the definition of CP reflected the
definitions by the American Association
of Pediatrics [27] and Straus and Donnelly [28]. We defined CP
as the use of physical force,
including spanking and hitting, for correcting or controlling a
child’s behavior.
We employed the definition of NP behaviors developed by
Straus and Kantor [29]. NP

behaviors are those that constitute a failure to act in ways
presumed by a society’s culture to be
necessary to meet a child’s developmental needs and that are
the caregiver’s responsibility to
provide.
Measurements
We constructed a five-part questionnaire, drawing on existing
instruments for use in the general
population. Our self-reported anonymous questionnaire (paper-
based) covered demographic
characteristics, experiences of CP and NP, recent physical and
mental health conditions, endorse-
ment of parental use of CP, and subjective well-being. Since no
official Japanese version existed
for a pre-existing instrument, we conducted a translation using
cross-cultural translation method-
ology and validation based on Acquadro et al. [30], and we
checked the reliability of these transla-
tions by confirmatory factor analyses and calculation of
Cronbach’s α coefficients.
Demographic data
The first part of the questionnaire collected basic demographic
data (i.e., gender, age, number of

siblings, birth-order, mother’s and father’s ages, and years of
education completed by parents) and
basic information about the participant’s academic affiliation
and major (i.e., university classes).
Experience of parental corporal punishment
To assess participants’ experience of parental CP, two items
were translated into Japanese and
administered: one asked whether respondents had been hit or
spanked “a lot” before the age of
12, and the other asked whether they were hit “a lot” during
their teenage years [31]. These
items were chosen because they have been used internationally
[31], facilitating comparisons
between findings.
Any response to these two items other than “strongly disagree”
was highly suggestive of the
respondent having experienced CP because of the inclusion of
the word “a lot” [31]; even if
October 26, 2018 3 / 16

they disagreed with “a lot,” they might agree with “a little.”
Thus, for either question, responses
of “strongly agree,” “agree,” and “disagree” were considered
suggestive of CP, and responses of
“agree” and “strongly agree” were considered to indicate
pervasive CP.
To form the predictor measure in this study, responses to the
two items concerning CP
(strongly agree = 4, agree = 3, disagree = 2, and strongly
disagree = 1) were summed to pro-
duce the score representing the experience of CP (CP score).
Experience of neglectful parenting
To assess participants’ experience of NP, the eight-item revised
version of the Multidimen-
sional Neglectful Behavior Scale Adult Recall Short Form
(revised MNBS-AS) was employed
[32]: two items concerning physical neglect (e.g., my parents
did not keep me clean), two
items concerning cognitive neglect (e.g., my parents did not
help me to do my best), two items
concerning emotional neglect (e.g., my parents did not comfort
me when I was upset), and
two items concerning supervisory neglect (e.g., my parents did
not care if I did things like

shoplifting). The revised MNBS-AS was developed as a brief
instrument for use in surveys tar-
geting general populations [29,32,33].
As a predictor measure in the study, responses to the eight items
of the revised MNBS-AS
were rated (strongly agree = 4, agree = 3, disagree = 2, and
strongly disagree = 1) and summed
to produce the score representing the experience of NP (NP
score). To distinguish between
single and multiple experiences of NP, we followed Straus and
Savage [33] by presenting sepa-
rate data about the percentage of students who reported three or
more experiences of NP,
which was evidence of “pervasive NP.”
Recent health condition
This part of the questionnaire concerned respondents’ self-
reported physical and mental health
condition over the past month. The official Japanese version of
the 8-item SF-8 Health Survey
was administered (e.g., During the past four weeks, how much
did physical health problems
limit your physical activities [such as walking or climbing
stairs]? and During the past four

weeks, how much have you been bothered by emotional
problems [such as feeling anxious,
depressed, or irritable]?) [34]. Two indicators, the physical
condition score (PCS) and mental
condition score (MCS), were calculated as indicators of
respondents’ recent health condition.
Subjective happiness
To capture each participant’s subjective well-being, we
administered the official Japanese ver-
sion of the Subjective Happiness Scale, a global SH seven-point
Likert scale consisting of four
items (e.g., Compared with most of my peers, I consider myself:
less happy (1–7) more happy;
Some people are generally very happy. They enjoy life
regardless of what is going on, getting
the most out of everything. To what extent does this
characterization describe you?) [35,36]. In
the present study, the SH score—the mean score of the four
items, assessed on the seven-point
Likert scale—was used as an outcome measure of subjective
well-being. The degree of SH rises
as the SH score increases.
Endorsement of parental use of physical punishment on children

as a form
of discipline
The Adult Adolescent Parenting Inventory-2 (AAPI-2) was
developed to assess the parenting
and child-rearing attitudes of adults and adolescents, regardless
of experience in raising their
own children [37]. We obtained permission to translate this
instrument into Japanese, and its
October 26, 2018 4 / 16
translated contents were confirmed using back-translation. In
the present study, our Japanese
version of AAPI-2 Form B was administered. We modified the
original five-point Likert scale
to a four-point scale (strongly disagree, disagree, agree, and
strongly agree) in this study to
avoid Japanese people’s tendency to choose the “uncertain”
response [38].
Following the 2005 edition of the AAPI Online Development
Handbook [37], we performed
a confirmatory factor analysis for each subscale of AAPI-2

Form B in our sample. We identi-
fied one factor (Cronbach’s α = 0.769) consisting of six items
regarding the endorsement of
the use of physical punishment (e.g., “Spanking children when
they misbehave teaches them
how to behave”). We called this factor the “Endorsement of
Physical Punishment as a Form of
Discipline Indicator” (EPP). The response to each EPP item was
rated as follows: strongly
agree = 4, agree = 3, disagree = 2, and strongly disagree = 1.
Adding the response ratings from
the six EPP items produces the EPP score, which was used as an
outcome measure in this
study. The degree of endorsement of physical punishment rises
as the EPP score increases.
Statistical methods
First, descriptive analyses were performed to examine
respondents’ demographic characteristics
and the frequency distributions of responses to items concerning
experience of CP and NP. To
examine the differences between the two groups of responses, t-
tests and chi-square tests or
Fisher’s exact test were conducted for parametric and non-
parametric variables, respectively.
Next, using data of 346 participants (56 men and 290 women),

we conducted multiple
regression analyses to detect the independent contributions of
the predictors of CP and NP
scores to the EPP score as outcome variable, adjusting for
participants’ basic demographic fac-
tors, undergraduate class, recent health condition on SF-8 (PCS,
MCS), and with/without the
SH score. As preparation for the multivariate analysis, bivariate
correlation analyses were per-
formed to examine the associations among the independent
variables, using list-wise case dele-
tion. Variance inflation factors (VIFs) were also used as
diagnostic for multicollinearity.
Another multiple regression analysis was conducted using the
SH score as an outcome variable
to examine the independent effects of CP and NP scores on the
SH score.
For all statistical analyses, SPSS version 24.0 for Windows
(IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA)
were used. A two-tailed P-value of less than 0.05 was required
for statistical significance.
Results
As shown in Table 1, there were no statistically significant
gender differences in the sociode-

mographic characteristics or present status of the 536
respondents, except for the variable “has
studied health or welfare at university.”
Experience of parental corporal punishment
Table 2 shows the frequency distribution of the number and
percentage of responses to the
two items concerning experience of parental CP. Responses of
“strongly agree,” “agree,” or
“disagree” on either or both of the items were considered
suggestive of CP, whereas responses
of “agree” or “strongly agree” were considered to indicate
pervasive CP.
Overall, 59.5% of students (72.1% of men and 56.5% of women)
provided responses sugges-
tive of experience of CP, indicating that they were spanked or
hit before the age of 12 by their
parents. Regarding their teenage years, 46.8% of students
(61.5% of men and 43.3% of women)
gave responses suggestive of experience of parental CP.
The percentage of respondents who gave answers suggestive of
experience of pervasive CP
was 22.8%. There was a significant gender difference, with
36.5% of men and 19.4% of women

(chi-square = 13.932, df = 1, P < 0.001) agreeing or strongly
agreeing with either or both items
October 26, 2018 5 / 16
concerning experience of CP. There was a strong association
between experience of pervasive
CP before the age of 12 and during the teenage years (chi -
square = 146.504, df = 1, P < 0.001).
Experiences of neglectful parenting behaviors
Table 2 presents the frequency distribution of responses to each
of the eight items used to
assess experience of NP. Emotional and cognitive forms of NP
were reported more frequently
than were physical and supervisory forms.
The percentage of respondents who gave answers suggestive of
experience of pervasive NP
was 12.2%. There was a significant gender difference, with
22.1% of men compared with 9.7%
of women (chi-square = 12.081, df = 1, P = 0.001) reporting
experience of pervasive NP.

Gender differences in predictor and outcome measures
The mean ± SD of the CP score among 346 respondents (56 men
and 290 women) was
3.5 ± 1.6 (range: 2–8, median: 3, skewness: 0.886, kurtosis:
0.196); as shown in Table 1, there
Table 1. Characteristics of the study participants (n = 536).
Male (n = 104)
Mean (SD) / n (%)
Female (n = 432)
Mean (SD) / n (%)
P-value�
Socio-demographic variables
Age 19.4 (0.71) 19.5 (0.96) 0.693
Number of siblings
†
2.5 (0.75) 2.5 (0.73) 0.785
Birth-order
‡
1.7 (0.79) 1.8 (0.79) 0.670
Mother’s age at birth
§

28.1 (4.1) 28.1 (3.9) 0.970
Age difference between mother and father (years)
k
-2.9 (4.2) -2.7 (3.5) 0.607
Mother’s years of education
¶
13.2 (1.6) 13.3 (1.6) 0.746
Father’s years of education
#
13.8 (2.1) 14.0 (2.0) 0.357
Undergraduate classes
Nursery education 21 (20.2%) 127 (29.4%) 0.059
Health nursing 11 (10.6%) 123 (28.5%) <0.001
Social welfare 51 (49.0%) 49 (11.3%) <0.001
Domestic science 0 62 (14.4%) <0.001
Nutrition 15 (14.4%) 39 (9.0%) 0.101
Psychosociology 6 (5.8%) 32 (7.4%) 0.674
Recent health condition on SF-8
Physical condition score (PCS) 48.9 (7.4) 51.3 (6.4) 0.014

Mental condition score (MCS) 45.9 (8.7) 43.4 (7.3) 0.025
Predictive and outcome measures��
Score representing experience of corporal punishment (CP
score) 4.3 (1.6) 3.4 (1.5) <0.001
Score representing experience of neglectful parenting (NP
score) 15.1 (2.8) 12.8 (3.3) <0.001
Subjective happiness (SH) score 4.6 (1.1) 4.7 (0.94) 0.836
Endorsement of parental use of physical punishment on children
(EPP) score 13.1 (3.4) 12.7 (2.7) 0.413
�Continuous variable: t-test; Categorical variable: chi-square
test or Fisher’s exact test
†n = 530 (104 males and 426 females)
‡n = 521 (103 males and 418 females)
§n = 462 (74 males and 388 females)
kn = 437 (70 males and 367 females)
¶n = 476 (87 males and 389 females)
#n = 461 (85 males and 376 females)
��n = 346 (56 males and 290 females).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206243.t001

October 26, 2018 6 / 16
was a significant gender difference in the mean CP score (P <
0.001).The mean ± SD of the
NP score among them was 13.1 ± 3.4 (range: 8–24, median: 13,
skewness: 0.427, kurtosis: −-
0.215); as shown in Table 1, there was a significant gender
difference in mean NP scores
(P < 0.001). The mean ± SD of the SH score among them was
4.6 ± 0.97 (range: 2–7, median:
4.5, skewness: 0.083, kurtosis: −0.151); as shown in Table 1,
there was no significant gender dif-
ference in mean SH scores (P = 0.836).The mean ± SD of the
EPP score among 346 respon-
dents (56 men and 290 women) was 12.8 ± 2.8 (range: 6–21,
median: 13, skewness: −0.028;
kurtosis: 0.269); as shown in Table 1, there was no significant
gender difference in mean EPP
scores (P = 0.413).
Associations between predictor and outcome variables
As shown in Table 3, a few variables were significantly
correlated with EPP or SH scores, but
no multicollinearity was detected among the study variables by
VIFs. Hence, we included
some non-significant variables into the regression models based

on the previous evidence. As
shown in Table 4, by multiple regression analysis, the CP score
had a significantly positive
effect on the EPP score, whereas the NP score had no
significant effect on the EPP score. The
robustness of the standardized partial regression coefficient of
the CP score was demonstrated
by controlling for respondents’ basic demographic factors, the
NP score, undergraduate clas-
ses, and PCS and MCS (adjusted R
2
= 0.135). Subsequently, after the inclusion of the SH score
in the model, the results did not change (ΔR2 = 0.001) and the
CP score had a significantly pos-
itive effect on the EPP score (β = 0.310, P < 0.001). Another
independent variable with
Table 2. Frequency distribution of responses to each question
on experience of parental corporal punishment and neglectful
parenting in childhood and adoles-
cence (n = 536: 104 men and 432 women).
Corporal punishment item Strongly disagree
n (%)
Disagree

n (%)
Agree
n (%)
Strongly agree
n (%)
When I was less than 12 years old, I was spanked or hit a lot by
my mother or father. Men 29 (27.9) 40 (38.5) 29 (27.9) 6 (5.8)
Women 188 (43.5) 165 (38.2) 57 (13.2) 22 (5.1)
When I was a teenager, I was hit a lot by my mother or father.
Men 40 (38.5) 46 (44.2) 14 (13.5) 4 (3.8)
Women 245 (56.7) 151 (35.0) 28 (6.5) 8 (1.9)
Revised MNBS-AS item (sub-category of neglect) Strongly
disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree
My parents helped me when I had trouble understanding
something.
1
Men 2 (1.9) 18 (17.3) 63 (60.6) 21 (20.2)
(cognitively) Women 10 (2.3) 61 (14.1) 247 (57.2) 114 (26.4)
My parents did not comfort me when I was upset. Men 15 (14.4)
56 (53.8) 27 (26.0) 6 (5.8)
(emotionally) Women 121 (28.0) 211 (48.8) 80 (18.5) 20 (4.6)

My parents helped me when I had problems.
1
Men 3 (2.9) 29 (27.9) 52 (50.0) 20 (19.2)
(emotionally) Women 7 (1.6) 73 (16.9) 230 (53.2) 122 (28.2)
My parents did not care if I did things like shoplifting. Men 60
(57.7) 30 (28.8) 11 (10.6) 3 (2.9)
(supervisory) Women 320 (74.1) 104 (24.1) 7 (1.6) 1 (0.2)
My parents did not help me to do my best. Men 24 (23.1) 56
(53.8) 17 (16.3) 7 (6.7)
(cognitively) Women 220 (50.9) 188 (43.5) 20 (4.6) 4 (0.9)
My parents gave me enough clothes to keep me warm.
1
Men 2 (1.9) 8 (7.7) 52 (50.0) 42 (40.4)
(physically) Women 8 (1.9) 16 (3.7) 147 (34.0) 261 (60.4)
My parents did not keep me clean. Men 46 (44.2) 47 (45.2) 7
(6.7) 4 (3.8)
(physically) Women 297 (68.8) 120 (27.8) 9 (2.1) 6 (1.4)
My parents did not care if I got into trouble in school. Men 51
(49.0) 42 (40.4) 10 (9.6) 1 (1.0)
(supervisory) Women 284 (65.7) 131 (30.3) 11 (2.5) 6 (1.4)
1: reverse-scored item

October 26, 2018 7 / 16
T
a
b
le
3
.
P
e
a
rs
o
n
’s
c
o
rr
e
la

ti
o
n
c
o
e
ff
ic
ie
n
ts
b
y
b
iv
a
ri
a
te
c
o
rr
e
la

ti
o
n
a
n
a
ly
se
s
a
m
o
n
g
st
u
d
y
v
a
ri
a
b
le

s
(l
is
t-
w
is
e
,
n
=
3
4
6
).
①
②
③
④
⑤
⑥
⑦
⑧
⑨
⑩

⑪
⑫
⑬
⑭
⑮
⑯
①
1
②
0
.3
2
0
�
�
�
1
③
0
.1
2
2
�
�
0

.2
4
6
�
�
�
1
④
-0
.0
4
4
-0
.2
1
0
�
�
�
-0
.2
5
4
�
�
�

1
⑤
0
.0
1
8
-0
.0
7
8
�
0
.0
3
6
0
.0
2
1
1
⑥
-0
.0
1

5
-0
.0
5
6
0
.0
3
3
0
.0
4
2
-0
.0
5
2
1
⑦
-0
.0
4
8
-0

.0
7
0
�
0
.0
1
9
0
.0
3
9
0
.0
5
6
0
.5
1
2
�
�
�
1

⑧
0
.0
2
2
-0
.0
4
8
0
.0
4
2
0
.0
3
2
0
.1
0
2
�
�
0
.1

5
3
�
�
�
0
.5
0
0
�
�
�
1
⑨
-0
.0
6
8
0
.0
8
3
�
-0
.0

4
3
-0
.0
0
6
-0
.0
2
0
-0
.0
1
5
0
.0
1
9
0
.2
4
2
�
�
�

1
⑩
-0
.0
5
7
-0
.1
2
8
�
�
�
-0
.0
8
9
�
�
0
.0
2
1
0
.0

8
5
�
-0
.0
Parental Corporal Punishment Predicts Behavior Problems
in Early Childhood
Matthew K. Mulvaney and Carolyn J. Mebert
University of New Hampshire
Using data from the National Institute of Child Health and
Human Development Study of
Early Child Care and Youth Development (Research Triangle
Institute, 2002), this study
examined the impact of corporal punishment (CP) on children’s
behavior problems. Longi-
tudinal analyses were specified that controlled for covarying
contextual and parenting
variables and that partialed child effects. The results indicate
that parental CP uniquely
contributes to negative behavioral adjustment in children at
both 36 months and at 1st grade,
with the effects at the earlier age more pronounced in children
with difficult temperaments.
Parents and mental health professionals who work to modify
children’s negative behavior
should be aware of the unique impact that CP likely plays in
triggering and maintaining
children’s behavior problems. Broad-based family policies that
reduce the use of this

parenting behavior would potentially increase children’s mental
health and decrease the
incidence of children’s behavior problems.
Keywords: corporal punishment, physical punishment, parental
discipline, behavior
problems
Corporal punishment (CP) is defined as “the use of phys-
ical force with the intention of causing a child pain, but not
injury, for the purposes of correction or control of the
child’s behavior” (Straus, 2001, p. 4). More than 90% of
children and approximately 50% of adolescents during their
adolescent years have experienced parental CP at least once
(Straus & Stewart, 1999). This form of discipline is admin-
istered frequently—an average of three times per week
during the toddler years (Straus, 2001)—and it is used more
often with male, African American, and poor children
(Straus & Stewart, 1999). Thus, for many children, CP
represents an important component of their socialization
experiences within the family. However, because of limita-
tions in most of the relevant research, relatively few defin-
itive conclusions can be drawn about the effects of CP on
child adjustment.
Most available research indicates that there are few, if
any, positive developmental outcomes associated with CP
beyond immediate compliance with a parent’s directive
(Gershoff, 2002). In fact, a growing body of research sug-
gests there may be unintended negative consequences, in-
cluding increasing children’s aggressive behavior and their
likelihood of becoming delinquent and contributing to
poorer psychological and cognitive functioning (e.g., Ger-
shoff, 2002; Smith & Brooks-Gunn, 1997). The strongest
link is between CP and externalizing behavior problems,

especially aggression (e.g., Strassberg, Dodge, Pettit, &
Bates, 1994; Straus & Kantor, 1994). Internalizing prob-
lems, such as depression and lower self-esteem, have also
been linked to CP (e.g., Turner & Finkelhor, 1996). Al-
though there are some contrary findings (e.g., Simons, John-
son, & Conger, 1994), most available evidence indicates
that CP represents a risk factor for the development of
negative behavioral, psychological, and cognitive character -
istics.
Despite the many studies linking parental CP to negative
developmental outcomes, there is continuing debate among
social scientists and policymakers regarding the interpreta-
tion of these studies and the overall conclusions that can be
drawn about the unique, specific impact of CP (e.g., Baum-
rind, 1996; Baumrind, Larzelere, & Cowan, 2002). A major
factor underlying the controversy is that there are aspects of
the research that limit interpretations, including the nonex-
perimental, correlational methodology that must be em-
ployed to examine outcomes. As is the case with most
research concerning the effects of parental socialization
practices, third variables and child effects may explain the
reported associations between CP and child outcomes.
Several parenting variables covary with the use of CP and
therefore generally are not controlled in examinations of the
relation between CP and child outcomes. Although CP is
used within all parenting-style groups described by Baum-
rind (1973), its use varies reliably between groups. Many
authoritative parents use CP, but authoritarian parents use it
much more frequently; permissive parents use it less fre-
Matthew K. Mulvaney and Carolyn J. Mebert, Department of
Psychology, University of New Hampshire.
We thank Murray Straus, Toni Bisconti, and Glenda Kaufman-

Kantor for their helpful contributions to this research.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to
Matthew K. Mulvaney, who is now at the Department of
Psychology,
State University of New York College at Brockport, 350 New
Cam-
pus Drive, Brockport, NY 14420. E-mail: [email protected]
Journal of Family Psychology Copyright 2007 by the American
Psychological Association
2007, Vol. 21, No. 3, 389 –397 0893-3200/07/$12.00 DOI:
10.1037/0893-3200.21.3.389
389
quently but more harshly (Parke & Collmer, 1975). The link
between CP and negative developmental outcomes may
thus be reflecting the influence of the broader parenting
style rather than CP specifically. Supporting this notion,
Simons et al. (1994) found that CP significantly predicted
aggressiveness and delinquency but that the effects became
nonsignificant after controlling for parental involvement.
Similarly, Larzelere, Kleinn, Schumm, and Alibrando
(1989) found that the amount of CP received in adolescence
negatively predicted self-esteem but that the association
became nonsignificant after controlling for the amount of
positive communication in the parent– child relationship.
However, not all research supports the notion that the ef-
fects of CP are epiphenomenal to broader parenting styles.
For instance, Buehler and Gerard (2002) reported that CP
influenced global psychological functioning, even after con-
trolling for parental involvement. The issue of whether CP
influences development beyond the parenting context in
which it is used is far from resolved, but it is evident that

models examining the influence of CP must simultaneously
consider the parenting style in which it occurs.
An additional problem with the reliance on correlational
methods is that it is difficult to identify the direction of the
effects (e.g., Baumrind, 1997). Most studies assume a
parent-to-child effect, although it is clear that within-child
characteristics play an important role in evoking different
kinds of parenting behaviors (Lengua & Kovacs, 2005;
Scarr & McCartney, 1983). Distinguishing the direction of
effects between physical discipline and child outcomes is
imperative. An effective way to deal with this issue is to
employ developmental designs in which the outcome be-
havior of interest is statistically controlled at the initial time
point (Collins, Maccoby, Steinberg, Hetherington, & Born-
stein, 2000). That is, the behavior of interest, along with the
measure of parental behavior, is measured at the initial
assessment. The prediction equation then controls for the
initial level of the outcome variable so that the actual
influence of parental behavior can be determined. Recent
studies of CP have incorporated such designs and have
provided more convincing evidence for a parent-to-child
effect in antisocial and other problem behavior (e.g., Lengua
& Kovacs, 2005; Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997).
A final issue is how best to conceptualize the impact of
CP on children’s development. Given the array of outcomes
associated with CP, a simple social learning model does not
provide a sufficient explanation. Rather, as Turner and
Finkelhor (1996) have argued, the effect of CP may best be
understood from a stress-process framework. Receiving
physical discipline from a parent is likely to be stressful for
a child, and children who are continuously exposed to
stressors in their environment (and perceive them as stress-
ful) show increased internalizing and externalizing behav-
iors (e.g., Cicchetti & Toth, 1991; Grant et al., 2003).

Repetti, Taylor, and Seeman (2002) suggested that ongoing
stress within the family environment will have long-term
effects on mental health via changes in the biological self-
regulatory systems of the child. Repetti et al. also describe,
beyond physiological changes that increase susceptibility to
mental health disorders, a transactional process in which
family stressors lead to additional developmental problems,
including decreased emotion processing and poorer peer
relationships. These, in turn, contribute to poorer mental
health. The effects may also be cumulative, with CP that
extends throughout childhood being the most detrimental.
Contextual variables may contribute to the stress re-
sponse of children to their parents’ discipline and moderate
the impact of that discipline. Supporting this notion is the
work on parenting style mentioned above, as well as re-
search on ethnic group differences in the effects of CP.
Specifically, CP has been found to be associated with ag-
gression in European American children but not in African
American children, even though CP is used with greater
frequency by African American parents (Deater-Deckard &
Dodge, 1997; Gunnoe & Mariner, 1997). This may reflect
both a greater degree of cultural acceptance of CP within
African American communities, including the view that it is
a legitimate parental behavior, and differing interpretations
of such punishment by African American and European
American children. However, following a review of the
relevant studies, Horn, Joseph, and Cheng (2004) cautioned
that additional research, particularly longitudinal studies
controlling for potentially confounding variables (e.g., so-
cioeconomic status, child effects), is necessary before con-
clusions can be drawn about ethnic or racial differences in
the effects of CP.
In the present study, the effects of parental CP on tod-

dlers’ and young children’s behavior problems were exam-
ined in the large, longitudinal, and diverse data set of the
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development
(NICHD SECCYD; Research Triangle Institute, 2002). The
primary focus of the analyses was to clarify the existence
and direction of influence of parental behavior on develop-
mental outcomes. It was hypothesized that CP would be
associated with both broadband categories of problem be-
haviors (externalizing and internalizing behaviors) at 36
months and first grade. The developmental analyses that
were performed included controlling for outcome variables
at an initial time point, which allowed for stronger claims to
be made about the direction of effects (Collins et al., 2000).
Because of the myriad parenting and contextual variables
assessed, it was possible to control for a substantial number
of factors implicated in the relation between CP and nega-
tive child outcomes (e.g., parenting style, income, maternal
depression, and ethnicity). A test of the moderating effect of
intrapersonal and contextual variables on the impact of CP
was also included. It was hypothesized that child tempera-
ment and African American ethnicity would moderate the
influence of CP on these developmental outcomes.
Method
Sample
Data collection for the NICHD SECCYD (Research Tri-
angle Institute, 2002), a multisite longitudinal study de-
signed to examine the effects of child care on children’s
development, began in 1991 and continues presently. The
390 MULVANEY AND MEBERT

sample originally consisted of 705 male (51.7%) and 659
(48.3%) female children. There were 1,014 non-Hispanic
Caucasian (74.34%), 176 African American (12.9%), 83
Hispanic (6.09%), and 93 otherwise classified (6.82%) chil-
dren. The mean age of the mothers at their child’s birth was
28.11 years (SD ! 5.63). Twenty-four percent of the fam-
ilies were classified as living in poverty, as indicated by an
income-to-needs ratio of less than 1. For more detailed
recruitment procedures of the NICHD SECCYD, see the
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (2001).
At the first-grade assessment, 1,028 mothers (75.37% of
the original sample) completed the outcome measure of
interest in the present study (the Child Behavior Checklist
[CBCL]; Achenbach, 1991). As is the case with most lon-
gitudinal studies, participant attrition occurred in a nonran-
dom fashion. Independent-sample t tests, with status in first
grade as the between-subjects factor (still participating or
not), were computed to assess group differences in maternal
education and average income. Families that completed the
first-grade outcome measure had a higher average income-
to-needs ratio (M ! 3.55, SD ! 2.68) than did families that
did not (M ! 2.67, SD ! 2.92), t(1353) ! 5.05, p " .001,
d ! .27. Mothers in families participating at the first-grade
level had more years of education (M ! 14.46, SD ! 2.45)
than did those who were not (M ! 13.56, SD ! 2.57),
t(1361) ! 5.76, p " .001, d ! .31. Ethnicity was also
associated with subject attrition, #2(5, N ! 1,364) ! 12.69,
p " .05, $ ! .10. There were more Caucasian families than
African American families in the first-grade sample relative
to the initial sample.
Measures
CP. The CP variable was derived from the Home Obser-

vation for the Measurement of the Environment (HOME;
Caldwell & Bradley, 1984), administered when the children
were 15, 36, and 54 months of age. HOME assesses the
overall quality of the family environment by both interview -
ing the mother and observing the family in a naturalistic
setting during an extensive observation process. Two items
from HOME were used: (a) an interview with the mother, to
determine whether the children had been spanked more than
once in the previous week, and (b) the test administrators’
observation of whether the children were spanked in their
presence. Scores could range from 0 to 2, depending on
whether the answer to neither, one, or both of the items was
a yes. Because this composite variable included both self-
report and observations of the parenting behavior, the va-
lidity of the measure should be better than either alone,
although a two-item measure is not ideal with respect to
reliability. Despite the potentially decreased reliability, re -
searchers have been able to employ this measure, or very
similar measures, to investigate the impact of CP on devel -
opmental outcomes (McLoyd & Smith, 2002; Smith &
Brooks-Gunn, 1997).
Behavior problems. The CBCL (Achenbach, 1991,
1992) was used as an index of children’s behavior problems.
The CBCL for Ages 2–3 (CBCL/2–3; Achenbach, 1992)
was administered at 36 months, and the CBCL for Ages
4 –18 (CBCL/4 –18; Achenbach, 1991) was administered
when the children were in first grade. Mothers completed
the scale in their homes at 36 months and in the lab during
the first-grade assessment. The broadband Externalizing and
Internalizing scales were used at both ages. Although these
scales assess conceptually similar constructs across the two
ages, the overlap in the actual items is modest, reflecting
age-related differences in behavioral characteristics. Stan-
dardized T scores were used in the following analyses:

Demographic characteristics and temperament. At the
1-month assessment, the mothers reported on their chil-
dren’s ethnicity and sex. When the children were 6 months
of age, the mothers completed the Activity, Adaptability,
Approach, Mood, and Intensity subscales of the Infant Tem-
perament Questionnaire—Revised (Carey & McDevitt,
1978). The scores of the nonmissing items for all subscales
were combined into a single variable, called difficult child
temperament, by averaging across the items. Higher scores
represent a more “difficult” temperament. The measure has
been found to have good test–retest reliability (Carey &
McDevitt, 1978). Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was .81.
Maternal depression. When the children were 1, 6, 15,
24, 36, and 54 months of age, as well as during the first-
grade assessment, the mothers completed the Center for
Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D; Rad-
loff, 1977), a well-known measure with good psychometric
properties. Cronbach’s alpha for this sample was equal to or
greater than .88 for each assessment.
Income-to-needs. Income-to-needs information was ob-
tained when children were 1, 6, 15, 24, 36, and 54 months
old, as well as when they were in first grade, via interviews
with the parents. At each age, the income of the total
household from all sources was divided by the cutoff point
for poverty for that particular year, as based on the number
of people in the household, with guidelines established by
the U.S. Bureau of the Census (2004).
Maternal sensitivity. Maternal sensitivity was assessed
when children were 6, 15, 24, 36, and 54 months old, as well
as when they were in first grade, with a semistructured
observational procedure. This procedure, specifically de-
signed for the NICHD SECCYD by D. L. Vandell and M. T.

Owen, consists of observing a mother and her child playing
with age-appropriate toys. For detailed information about
the development and administration of the scale, see
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network (1999). The 6-
and 15-month measures were assessed in the family’s home.
The 24-, 36-, and 54-month and first-grade measures were
assessed in a laboratory. For the 6-, 15-, and 24-month
assessments, a composite measure of sensitivity was created
by summing global ratings of sensitivity to nondistress,
intrusiveness (reverse scored), and positive regard. For mea -
sures at 36 and 54 months, as well as in first grade, the
sensitivity composite was constructed by summing support-
ive presence, hostility (reverse-scored), and respect for au-
tonomy. All interactions were videotaped and coded at a
central location. At all ages, approximately 20% of the
interactions were coded by a second coder and yielded the
following interrater reliability coefficients: .87, .83, .84 .84,
.79, and .84 for the 6-, 15-, 24-, 36-, and 54-month and
391CORPORAL PUNISHMENT AND BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS
first-grade composite measures, respectively. Higher scores
indicate more sensitive parenting. Scores on this measure
are significantly related to attachment, suggesting moderate
construct validity (NICHD Early Child Care Research Net-
work, 1997).
Results
Data Analysis Plan
To isolate the unique and directional influence of parental
CP on developmental outcomes in infancy and early child-
hood, we specified two sets of hierarchical multiple-

regression models. The first set assessed the impact of CP in
infancy and toddlerhood by examining the associations be-
tween the 15-month CP variable and the 36-month Internal-
izing and Externalizing scores. The second set of analyses
examined the associations between internalizing and exter-
nalizing behavior problems in first grade and a composite
CP variable constructed from the 36- and 54-month assess-
ments. Because of the temporal precedence of the CP vari -
able in these analyses, its unique contribution to the predic-
tion of the subsequently measured behaviors would
strengthen a causal argument for the directional influence of
CP on developmental outcomes. All analyses were carried
out with the actual sample and with the sample weighted to
account for the relation between ethnicity and attrition.
These analyses yielded virtually identical results, so onl y
the unweighted versions are presented.
For each model, the child’s gender, ethnicity, and tem-
perament and the aggregate variables maternal sensitivity,
maternal depression, and family income-to-needs were in-
cluded as control variables. The wide array of control vari-
ables included in these analyses should decrease the likeli -
hood of omitted-variables bias. The maternal depression,
family income, and maternal sensitivity variables were ob-
tained over the course of earlier assessments and col -
lapsed into a single measure for each analysis by aver-
aging across all the assessments. The internal consistency
for each of these composite measures was acceptable
(Cronbach’s % & .69).
CP and Behavior Problems at 36 Months
The correlation matrix and descriptive statistics for all
variables in the first set of analyses are in Table 1. The CP
variable was modestly associated with both of the outcome
variables (36-month externalizing and internalizing behav-

iors). The matrix also indicated substantial covariation be-
tween the CP, control, and outcome variables. Maternal
depression had the strongest association with the variables
of interest, likely reflecting the fact that many of the child
variables were measured through maternal report. Thus,
controlling for depression is important for all analyses, not
only because of the influence of maternal mental health on
children’s development but also because mothers’ percep-
tions of children’s behavior are influenced by their own
mental health (e.g., Fergusson, Lynskey, Horwood, 1993;
Mebert, 1991).
For the regression analyses, the control variables were
entered in the first step. In the second step, the CP variable
was entered. A product of the standardized CP and difficult
child temperament variables, which assessed the moderat-
ing role of difficult child temperament, was also entered in
the second step. The results of the analyses predicting both
externalizing and internalizing behaviors at 36 months are
in Table 2. This table contains the standardized and unstand-
ardized regression coefficients, the standard errors, and the
partial correlations for each model. For internalizing behav-
iors, the first step was significant, F(6, 1131) ! 49.38, p "
.001, adjusted R2 ! .20. Maternal depression and sensitivity
and difficult child temperament were unique predictors. At
the second step, CP, but not the interaction term, contributed
significantly to the proportion of variance accounted for,
F(2, 1129) ! 3.62, p " .05, 'R2 ! .005. All variables that
had been associated with internalizing in the first step re-
mained significant in the second step.
In the analysis of externalizing behaviors, the first step
was also significant, F(6, 1131) ! 39.83, p " .001, adjusted
R2 ! .17. As shown in Table 2, both maternal depression
and difficult child temperament were associated with in-
creased externalizing behavior. In the second step, the CP

variable and the interaction term were found to add signif-
Table 1
Descriptives and Correlation Matrix for Variables Used in the
36-Month Analysis (N ! 1,138)
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. 36-month externalizing behaviors 51.07 8.49 — .70*** (.04
.07** .24*** .38*** (.18*** (.20*** .20***
2. 36-month internalizing behaviors 51.16 9.50 — .04 .10***
.26*** .41*** (.18*** (.23*** .16***
3. Gender (female) 1.49 0.50 — .00 .04 .02 .04 .10*** (.11***
4. Ethnicity (African American) 0.11 0.32 — .17*** .16***
(.27*** (.40*** .11***
5. Difficult child temperament (0.01 0.99 — .23*** (.14***
(.18*** .08**
6. Average maternal depression 9.43 6.40 — (.29*** (.33***
.19***
7. Average income-to-needs 3.47 2.74 — .44*** (.25***
8. Average maternal sensitivity 0.02 0.74 — (.34***
9. Corporal punishment (0.01 1.00 —
Note. The average maternal depression, income-to-needs, and
maternal sensitivity variables are aggregates of all assessments
up to and
including the 36-month assessment. The difficult child
temperament, average maternal sensitivity, and corporal
punishment variables are
standardized (Z scores).
** p " .01. *** p " .001.
392 MULVANEY AND MEBERT

icantly to the prediction equation, F(2, 1129) ! 8.87, p "
.001, 'R2 ! .01. Figure 1 displays the interaction. In this
figure, the externalizing scores at 36 months were regressed
onto the 15-month CP raw scores separately for children
with “easy” and “difficult” temperaments, as designated by
a median split. CP was more strongly associated with ex-
ternalizing behavior problems for children with more diffi -
cult temperaments.
CP and Behavior Problems in First Grade
Correlations and descriptive statistics for the variables
used in the first-grade analyses are in Table 3. CP was
associated with all control and outcome variables used in
these analyses. The 36-month broadband factors were
strongly correlated with the same broadband factors at first
grade.
The first-grade regression models employed residualized
change analysis in which the outcome variable of interest
was statistically controlled at an earlier time (36 months).
That is, mothers’ 36-month ratings of internalizing (or ex-
ternalizing) behaviors were included as a control variable in
predicting internalizing (or externalizing) behavior at first
grade. Although this method of analysis is correlational and
constrained by limitations in causal interpretation, it can
provide strong evidence of a parent-to-child effect (e.g.,
Collins et al., 2000). The other control variables that were
entered in the first step were the child’s gender, ethnicity,
and temperament and the aggregate variables maternal sen-
sitivity, maternal depression, and family income-to-needs.
In the second step, CP and an interaction variable represent-
ing the moderating impact of African American ethnicity on
CP was tested. The CP variable used in these analyses was
a standardized average of the 36- and 54-month measures.
Two interaction variables were constructed and tested as

moderators. The first interaction variable was constructed
by multiplying the standardized 6-month difficult child tem-
perament variable by the aggregate CP variable. The second
interaction variable was constructed by multiplying the Af-
rican American status variable by the aggregate CP variable.
Only control variables contributed to the prediction of
internalizing behaviors at first grade. Neither CP nor the
moderator terms were significantly associated with change
in internalizing behaviors.
CP was, however, associated with increased externalizing
behaviors from 36 months to first grade. These results are
presented in Table 4. The first step was significant, F(7,
971) ! 77.68, p " .001, adjusted R2 ! .35. Not surpris-
ingly, externalizing behavior at 36 months was strongly
associated with externalizing behavior in first grade. The
child’s gender predicted change in externalizing behavior,
as did maternal depression and family income. In the second
step, CP, but not the interaction terms, contributed signifi -
cantly to the variance accounted for, F(3, 968) ! 2.93, p "
.05, 'R2 ! .006. The control variables that had been sig-
nificant in the first step remained significant with the inclu-
sion of CP and the interaction variables. We also respecified
this model to test an additional moderating hypothesis. A
term representing the interaction between the 36-month
externalizing behavior and the CP variables was entered in
the second step. It was not significantly associated with
first-grade externalizing behavior.
Discussion
The primary goal of this study was to address the con-
cerns of researchers (e.g., Baumrind, 1996; Baumrind et al.
2002) who have argued that normative CP does not have

detrimental effects on children’s adjustment. Although this
study does not address all of the concerns of these research-
Table 2
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analyses Predicting 36-
Month Behavior Problems
Variable
Externalizing behaviors Internalizing behaviors
B SE ) Sr B SE ) Sr
Step 1
Gender (female) (0.71 0.46 (.04 0.61 0.51 .03
Ethnicity (African American) (1.19 0.81 (.04 (0.85 0.88 (.03
Difficult child temperament 1.36 0.24 .16*** 1.56 0.26 .17***
Average material depression 0.41 0.04 .31*** 0.51 0.04 .34***
Average income-to-needs (0.16 0.10 (.05 (0.09 0.10 (.03
Average maternal sensitivity (0.68 0.38 (.06 (1.12 0.41 (.09**
Step 2
Gender (female) (0.57 0.46 (.03 (.03 0.70 0.51 .04 .04
Ethnicity (African American) (1.09 0.80 (.04 (.04 (0.79 0.88
(.03 (.02
Difficult child temperament 1.39 0.24 .16*** .16 1.56 0.26
.17*** .16
Average maternal depression 0.40 0.04 .30*** .27 0.50 0.04
.34*** .30
Average income-to-needs (0.13 0.10 (.04 (.04 (0.08 0.11 (.02
(.02
Average maternal sensitivity (0.28 0.39 (.03 (.02 (0.85 0.43
(.07* (.05
Corporal punishment 0.93 0.25 .11*** .10 0.59 0.27 .06* .06
Corporal Punishment * Difficult Child Temperament 0.47 0.24
.06* .05 0.43 0.26 .04 .04

Note. The difficult child temperament and corporal punishment
variables are standardized. The gender and ethnicity variables
are
dichotomous variables. The average maternal depression,
income-to-needs and maternal sensitivity variables are
aggregated from all
assessments prior to and inclusive of the 36-month assessment.
* p " .05. ** p " .01. *** p " .001.
393CORPORAL PUNISHMENT AND BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS
ers and certainly does not conclusively establish a causal
link between CP and child adjustment, the results extend
and complement the growing body of literature suggesting
that there is a unique negative impact of CP on children’s
behavior problems. CP was associated with increased inter -
nalizing behaviors during toddlerhood and with increased
externalizing behavior problems both in toddlerhood and at
first grade. Although this research was correlational, several
features of the analyses strengthen a causal argument re-
garding the impact of CP on behavioral outcomes. First, the
presumed causal variable (i.e., CP) was assessed temporally
prior to the outcome …
10.1177/0192513X03258313 ARTICLEJOURNAL OF FAMILY
ISSUES / September 2004Turner, Muller / LONG-TERM
EFFECTS OF CORPORAL PUNISHMENT
Long-Term Effects of Child Corporal
Punishment on Depressive Symptoms

in Young Adults
Potential Moderators and Mediators
HEATHER A. TURNER
PAUL A. MULLER
University of New Hampshire
Based on a sample of 649 students from 3 New England
colleges, this study examined the
long-term effects of childhood corporal punishment on
symptoms of depression and consid-
ered factors that may moderate or mediate the association.
Similar to national studies, ap-
proximately 40% of the sample reported experiencing some
level of corporal punishment
when they were 13 years old. Findings indicated that level of
corporal punishment is posi-
tively related to depressive symptoms, independent of any
history of abuse and the frequency
of other forms of punishment. Although parental monitoring and
perceived norms regarding
corporal punishment had no direct or moderating effects, level
of parental anger during cor-
poral punishment was the strongest predictor of depression. The
association between “angry
corporal punishment” and symptoms of depression in young
adulthood is partially mediated
by mastery and self-esteem. Implications of these finding are
discussed.
Keywords: corporal punishment; depression; parental anger;
self-concept
It is widely accepted, and there is much empirical evidence, that

Investment Analysis2182020Letter of IntentMemorandum of Und

Investment Analysis2182020Letter of IntentMemorandum of Und

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Investment Analysis2182020Letter of IntentMemorandum of Und

Similar to Investment Analysis2182020Letter of IntentMemorandum of Und (20)

More from mariuse18nolet

More from mariuse18nolet (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Investment Analysis2182020Letter of IntentMemorandum of Und