4.8 Review

Physical punishment and child outcomes: a narrative review of prospective studies

Journal

LANCET
Volume 398, Issue 10297, Pages 355-364

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00582-1

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development in the USA [P2CHD042849]
  2. UK Economic and Social Research Council [ES/R008930/1]
  3. ESRC [ES/R008930/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This narrative review of 69 longitudinal studies showed that physical punishment consistently predicts increased behavior problems in children over time, is associated with a higher risk of involvement with child protective services, and can lead to worsening behavior in children. The detrimental outcomes of physical punishment are robust across various child and parent characteristics.
Physical punishment is increasingly viewed as a form of violence that harms children. This narrative review summarises the findings of 69 prospective longitudinal studies to inform practitioners and policy makers about physical punishment's outcomes. Our review identified seven key themes. First, physical punishment consistently predicts increases in child behaviour problems over time. Second, physical punishment is not associated with positive outcomes over time. Third, physical punishment increases the risk of involvement with child protective services. Fourth, the only evidence of children eliciting physical punishment is for externalising behaviour. Fifth, physical punishment predicts worsening behaviour over time in quasi-experimental studies. Sixth, associations between physical punishment and detrimental child outcomes are robust across child and parent characteristics. Finally, there is some evidence of a dose-response relationship. The consistency of these findings indicates that physical punishment is harmful to children and that policy remedies are warranted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available