Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Poster #98 - The Unique Contribution of Paternal Physical Discipline to Children’s Externalizing Behaviors and Delinquency.

Fri, March 24, 11:30am to 12:15pm, Salt Palace Convention Center, Floor: 1, Hall A-B

Abstract

Background
Physical discipline is extensively associated with child behavioral problems (e.g. Heilmann et al., 2021). However, over 70% of Singaporean adults find caning children acceptable and practice it at home (Ho et al., 2019; Elliott et al., 1996). It is also largely not perceived as abuse (Lui et al., 2019). Early studies advocated for distinguishing parental gender within parenting research (Parke, 2002) due to the differentiated role of mothers and fathers as caregivers and disciplinarians (Sim & Ong, 2005). Yet, few studies separated the impact of mothers’/fathers’ use of physical discipline. This makes it imperative for us to understand how mothers’/fathers’ physical discipline impact child outcomes.
Objective
As this study utilizes parent-reported measures, we focus on externalizing behaviors as our measure of child outcome due to its observable nature as compared to others (e.g. internalizing disorders). Our study explores two questions: (1) Is there a difference in frequency of physical discipline between mothers/fathers? (2) How do mothers’ and fathers’ use of physical discipline uniquely predict children’s problematic behaviors?
Methods
Sample: Data of 326 mother-child dyads were used. They are a subsample recruited for the Growing Up in Singapore Towards healthy Outcomes cohort (Soh et al., 2014).
Measures: We measured mothers’/fathers’ physical discipline using the physical coercion dimension, obtained through mother-reported Parenting Styles and Dimensions Questionnaire–Short Version when their children were aged 4.5. Mothers provided frequency of physical discipline for themselves and their spouse (child’s father). Child outcome measures were the parent/caregiver-reported Child Behavior Checklist–Parent-Report Form when children were aged 7. Aggressive behavior, rule-breaking behavior and externalizing problems subscales were used.
Analysis: Paired samples T-test compared mothers’ and fathers’ frequency of physical discipline. Multiple regressions (child gender covaried) explored individual impacts of mothers’/fathers’ physical discipline and children’s outcomes. Lastly, post-hoc regressions were conducted for inconclusive results.
Results
T-tests demonstrated significantly higher use of physical discipline by mothers than fathers (p < .001) (Figure 1). Multiple regression analyses revealed that after controlling for the effect of the other parent’s use of physical discipline, fathers’ physical discipline significantly predicted children’s externalizing problems (p = .01) and rule-breaking behavior (p <.001) while mothers did not (both p > .10).
For child aggression, multiple regression analyses demonstrated that when the effect of the other parent was controlled for, parental physical discipline were insignificant predictors (both p > .05). Post-hoc linear regressions then demonstrated that analysed separately, both parents significantly predicted child aggression ( p < .05). This suggests that parental gender and physical discipline have a combined effect in child aggression. See Figure 2 for detailed visualization of regression analyses and descriptions.
Conclusion
Paternal physical discipline uniquely predicts externalizing behaviors and child delinquency, even after controlling for the effects of maternal physical discipline and child gender. Fathers’ physical discipline may be a primary contributor to children’s behavioral challenges. Although mothers administer more physical discipline, they have less impact on children’s problem behavior. Upcoming studies can explore risk factors around paternal physical discipline and protective factors that buffer the impact of maternal physical discipline.

Authors