Toggle sidebar

Study: Children Who Get Spanked Have Lower IQs

NYBamaFan

NYBamaFan

Suspended
Feb 2, 2002
23,316
14
0
Blairstown, NJ
Seriously, this is what is wrong with science today - it is driven by agenda instead of a search for knowledge and understanding. They started with an assumption: Children who get spanked have lower IQs. They then gathered data and pronounced:Children who get spanked have lower IQs because they were spanked, even when there is almost no evidence to support that conclusion. There is far more evidence that points toward socioeconomic and/or genetic factors. :rolleyes:

These "scientists" knew that any results would be horribly flawed because there are so many other factors that cannot be controlled a study like this, but they had an agenda and performed the study, and published the flawed results, anyway. They admit that the only way to get reliable results would be with a control group, which isn't going to happen for so many reasons, but they still went forward. If it wasn't so sad, it would be hysterically funny.

link...
 
Yeah, that's why my oldest son is on the national junior honor society...geez, what idiot did this research? My 7 year old writes in cursive and checks his 11 year old brother's math homework because he's that much further behind the curve due to periodically getting a few stern pats on the backside.
 
I got into MENSA despite my Daddy tearing my rear end up with a leather belt. I shudder to think how smart I'd have been without that abuse. Of course his belt was thinner and lighter than the one his Dad used on him, and my Daddy was pert near smart.
 
Please do not think that I am defending the methodology or results of this specific study. Consider this devil's advocate commentary.

NYBamaFan said:
Seriously, this is what is wrong with science today - it is driven by agenda instead of a search for knowledge and understanding. They started with an assumption: Children who get spanked have lower IQs. They then gathered data and pronounced:Children who get spanked have lower IQs because they were spanked, even when there is almost no evidence to support that conclusion. There is far more evidence that points toward socioeconomic and/or genetic factors. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter much that there are greater influences on general intelligence than the one they are studying. Finding a small, but statistically significant, effect does not itself invalidate the science.

NYBamaFan said:
These "scientists" knew that any results would be horribly flawed because there are so many other factors that cannot be controlled a study like this, but they had an agenda and performed the study, and published the flawed results, anyway.
Click to expand...
I think it is disingenuous to say they knew results would be "horribly flawed." Pretty much all meaningful science is full of caveats and imperfect controls.

"The results, he said, were statistically significant. And they held even after accounting for parental education, income, cognitive stimulation by parents and other factors that could affect children's mental abilities."

They don't say how they controlled for these things, so I cannot really comment on it.

NYBamaFan said:
They admit that the only way to get reliable results would be with a control group, which isn't going to happen for so many reasons, but they still went forward. If it wasn't so sad, it would be hysterically funny.
Click to expand...
The disclaimer is appropriate, but acknowledging that the study's methodology isn't ideal doesn't automatically discredit results. The next step would be independent confirmation of this study's observations and findings.

If their hypothesis holds up to greater scrutiny, then there may be some validity to their ideas. Until then, I would take their claims with a spoonful of salt.
 
Contrary to what everyone believes, being hit by parents is a traumatic experience
Click to expand...
I just do not understand this. I remember when I was a junior in HS, I took a "Home and Family" class. Most of us had been spanked when we were younger. There were two guys, both who said they were never spanked. One of those guys was arrested his senior year for selling drugs, then later was arrested for beating his girlfriend. The other guy dropped out of college his first semester, and last I heard was living at home with his parents working at Best Buy. He was probably 26 or so at that time.
The others in the class that I know of all have jobs, most are married, and seem to be doing "well" (whatever that means).

Now, that is a small group, but that holds pretty consistently with what I have seen in my life. Now that I have kids, I can often tell which "other" kids get spanked and which don't. At a church I used to attend, there was one couple that was always adamant about not spanking, about how they would feel so guilty if they spanked. They had two kids - both were absolute nightmares.

I know it is not as cut and dry as I am making it sound, but still. It just seems so apparent from my experiences that the opposite is true from what I read in articles like this.
 
cbi1972 said:
...If their hypothesis holds up to greater scrutiny, then there may be some validity to their ideas. Until then, I would take their claims with a spoonful of salt.
Click to expand...
The only way to know whether or not it is the parents, their socio-economic status, etc is to do random, controlled tests - which will never happen.

One would need to have a subset of parents that were spanked, never spank. One would need to have a subset of parents that were not spanked, spank. But, most importantly, it would have to also account for the IQ of the parents, with random controls for them as well. It would have to account for other socioeconomic conditions with random controls in place.

There have been studies on the tie of IQ to genetics with some pretty clear results. Environment plays a lesser role, but still an important one. But what environmental factor dominates, and why? No one knows. Despite this "study", we still don't have a clue.

Here is a great article about this topic: link

From the article:
So is it more important to come from smart parents or to be raised in an environment that is conducive to learning?

Generally speaking, talent trumps effort. Based on the research, a suitable conclusion is that while environment often shapes the raw inherited talent of the mind, the role of genetics in intelligence is powerful.

Studies in intelligence genetics have been conducted using adopted children living together and identical twins brought up apart. The twins, despite being raised separately, are a lot closer in intelligence than adopted children in the exact same environment...

...The role of environmental factors in general intelligence is usually estimated at no more than 25 percent. Most telling is that, despite wide disagreement in the numbers attributed to genetics intelligence, there is no evidence suggesting that our environment can increase intelligence to a relatively high level.
Click to expand...
 
Bodhisattva said:
I'm not sure if kids should be spanked...
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong - I am not one of those parents that believes that my way is the only right way - or even the right way. I try my best, and hope that it is enough.

But I believe that spanking a child to get their attention in a dangerous situation is more helpful than harmful. Even if this article is 100% correct, I would rather have a child that doesn't walk out into traffic without looking than a genius, dead at age 3.

And there is a clear difference between spanking a child and beating a child - though you will never be able to convince some of my friends of that fact. I suspect that this study was driven by people who see all spankings as abuse...
 
NYBamaFan said:
The only way to know whether or not it is the parents, their socio-economic status, etc is to do random, controlled tests - which will never happen.

One would need to have a subset of parents that were spanked, never spank. One would need to have a subset of parents that were not spanked, spank. But, most importantly, it would have to also account for the IQ of the parents, with random controls for them as well. It would have to account for other socioeconomic conditions with random controls in place.

There have been studies on the tie of IQ to genetics with some pretty clear results. Environment plays a lesser role, but still an important one. But what environmental factor dominates, and why? No one knows. Despite this "study", we still don't have a clue.

Here is a great article about this topic: link

From the article:
Click to expand...

I don't disagree at all about the influence of genetic factors on general intelligence.
In fact, I have seen first-hand some of the bias and agenda that exists in research facilities whose directors have a professional interest in promoting early childhood education.

Early childhood education is a wonderful thing, but in certain circles, even mentioning the validity of genetic factors influencing general intelligence is akin to blasphemy.

The thing is, I don't identify science this way. To me, true science is what allows biased, flawed, or otherwise invalid research to be exposed and discredited.
 
I tried to tell you and my research now proves it. You beat your kids--they're gonna be stupid.

Thomas+Dolby.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back