Chapter 6 Part 2 Flashcards
1
Q
punishment vs. discipline
A
- punishment: a consequence that causes an individual’s behaviour to occur with less frequency
- discipline: teaching/guiding
2
Q
7 types of discipline
A
- power-assertion
- inductive discipline
- positive discipline
- proactive discipline
- love withdrawal
- shaming
- guilt-induction
3
Q
power assertion
A
- using power/authority to force someone to do something (may be verbal, physical, etc.)
- no explanation provided
4
Q
inductive discipline
A
- explaining why a punishment is given or why a rule exists
- better than power assertion -> provides more opportunity for teaching
- not as effective for hyperactive kids
5
Q
positive discipline
A
- replace punishment with reinforcement as much as possible
- when using punishment, use logical or natural consequences rather than global ones (avoid using the same punishment for everything)
- should be preferred discipline style
6
Q
natural consequences
A
- parent does nothing, instead allowing natural consequence to unfold
- ex. rather than punishing them for eating dinner, let them face the natural consequence of going to bed hungry
7
Q
logical consequences
A
- planned consequence logically related to fixing the problem
- ie. if a kid breaks an object, consequence would be having them use their allowance to replace the item
8
Q
proactive discipline
A
- trying to prevent behaviour from occurring
- important during pre-school years
- ex. not allowing 2 kids to sit beside each other when they go out for dinner to prevent fighting
9
Q
love withdrawal
A
- withholding affection when the child misbehaves
- should not be used because it’s a form of psychological control
10
Q
shaming
A
- humiliating/embarrassing child, attacking child’s sense of self
- should not be used because it’s a form of psychological control
11
Q
guilt-induction
A
- making child feel bad/guilty about behaviour
- theoretically increases child’s empathy by forcing them to take perspective of someone else (ie. “how do you think hitting that boy made him feel?”)
- focuses on behaviour (not self)
- should be used sparingly because it’s a form of psychological control
12
Q
Baumrind’s 4 dimensions of parenting
A
- level of warmth and responsiveness
- level of clarity and consistency
- level of maturity demands
- level of communication
13
Q
level of warmth and responsiveness
A
- are you warm, or do your kids fear you?
- are you responsive (adapt based on child’s cues), or are you a dictator (don’t adapt)?
14
Q
level of clarity and consistency
A
- do you have clear rules, and consequences when those rules are broken?
- do you have consistent follow-through with those consequences?
15
Q
level of maturity demands
A
- some parents have higher standards for acceptable behaviour than others
- ex. expecting kids to do chores = higher standard
16
Q
level of communication
A
- is there 2-way communication between parent and child? (ie. lots of negotiation, discussion, family meetings, etc.)
17
Q
Baumrind’s 3 parenting styles
A
- authoritarian
- authoritative
- permissive
18
Q
authoritarian style
A
- strict
- low warmth and responsiveness
- high clarity and consistency
- high level of maturity demands
- low levels of communication
19
Q
authoritative style
A
- “ideal”
- high warmth and responsiveness
- high clarity and consistency
- high level of maturity demands
- high levels of communication
20
Q
permissive style
A
- lenient, lets kid get away with anything
- high warmth and responsiveness
- low clarity and consistency
- low levels of maturity demands
- low levels of communication
21
Q
which parenting style is associated with best outcomes?
A
- authoritive (for Western samples)
- but cross-cultural differences exist (ex. Best academic outcomes associated with authoritarian style for Chinese children; best outcomes for African-American samples also associated with authoritarian)
22
Q
4 parenting practices examined in NLSCY
A
- frequency of hostile parent-child interactions
- frequency of punitive parent-child interactions
- frequency of consistency in parent-child interactions
- frequency of positive parent-child interactions
23
Q
hostile parent-child interactions
A
rejecting a child, ridiculing/putting down a child, sarcasm/making fun of child, mix anger/hostility with punishment, love withdrawal, etc.
24
Q
punitive parent-child interactions
A
frequency of physical punishment used (ex. spanking frequency), proportion of punishment used relative to other types of discipline, etc.
25
consistency in parent-child interactions
establishing clear rules and consequences when those rules are broken, having consistent follow-through with those consequences, etc.
26
positive parent-child interactions
frequency of laughter, playing games together, having fun, talking to each other, etc.
27
the parenting practice associated with the most negative effects on children is?
hostility
28
positive parenting is a protective factor against the negative outcomes associated with?
poverty
29
consistent parenting is a protective factor against the negative outcomes typically associated with the effects of?
hyperactivity/low impulse control
30
Gershoff found that parental use of spanking is significantly correlated to...
- immediate child compliance (strongest correlation - positive)
- moral internalization in children (does kid do morally correct things when parents aren't around - positive)
- aggression in children (aggressive parent/model leads to aggressive kid - positive)
- quality of parent-child relationship (negative)
- mental illness in children (positive)
- physical abuse of children (positive)
31
coercion theory of physical abuse
one person is aggressive, causing the other person to be more aggressive, causing the first person to be even more aggressive -> leads to escalating cycle of violence until child (and potentially parent) is being physically abused
32
parental use of spanking correlates with the following long-term outcomes in adulthood
- aggression in adulthood (positive)
| - mental illness in adulthood (not significant)
33
methodological limitation of the Gershoff meta-analysis
- construct validity (is she measuring what she intended to? Is she measuring spanking or hostility? Spanking or physical abuse?)
34
How does Canadian law define "reasonable limits" in regards to using physical force on children?
- can only be used if child's between 2-12 years old
- open palm must be used
- no objects can be used
- cannot be to head/face
- cannot be mixed with hostility/anger (ie. can't chase kids down to spank them)
- must be transitory (short-term effects on child - if child wakes up with bruises, cuts, etc. or becomes afraid of parent/caregiver, it's NOT transitory)
