↓ Skip to main content

Do nonphysical punishments reduce antisocial behavior more than spanking? a comparison using the strongest previous causal evidence against spanking

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, February 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
10 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Do nonphysical punishments reduce antisocial behavior more than spanking? a comparison using the strongest previous causal evidence against spanking
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, February 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2431-10-10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert E Larzelere, Ronald B Cox, Gail L Smith

Abstract

The strongest causal evidence that customary spanking increases antisocial behavior is based on prospective studies that control statistically for initial antisocial differences. None of those studies have investigated alternative disciplinary tactics that parents could use instead of spanking, however. Further, the small effects in those studies could be artifactual due to residual confounding, reflecting child effects on the frequency of all disciplinary tactics. This study re-analyzes the strongest causal evidence against customary spanking and uses these same methods to determine whether alternative disciplinary tactics are more effective in reducing antisocial behavior.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 57 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 45%
Social Sciences 8 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 13 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,667,005
of 25,260,058 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#178
of 3,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,754
of 100,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#2
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,260,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,402 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 100,254 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 8 of them.