Universidad de La Sabana, Department of Psychology, Campus Universitario Puente del Común, Km,7 autopista Norte de Bogotá, Chía,olombiaResarch Group on Child and Adolescent Victimization (GReVIA), Universitat de Barcelona, Passeig Vall d’Hebron, 171, 08035 Barcelona,
pain
a r t i c l e i n f o
rticle history:eceived 12 December 2012eceived in revised form 5 October 2013ccepted 11 October 2013vailable online xxx
Objective: To reveal the prevalence of corporal punishment in a rural area of Colombia andits correlates to family structure and other socio-demographic variables. Method: A surveyabout childrearing and childcare was developed for this study, including a specific questionabout corporal punishment that was developed based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS).Family structure was categorized as follows, based on previous literature: ‘nuclear fam-ily,’ ‘single parent’ family, ‘extended family,’ ‘simultaneous family’ and ‘composed family.’Results: Forty-one percent of the parents surveyed admitted they had used corporal punish-ment of their children as a disciplinary strategy. The type of family structure, the numberof children living at home, the age of the children, the gender of the parent who answeredthe survey, and the age and gender of the partner were significant predictors of corporalpunishment. Conclusion: Family structure is an important variable in the understanding ofcorporal punishment, especially in regard to nuclear families that have a large number ofchildren and parents who started their parental role early in life.
The use of corporal punishment as a method to correct a child’s misbehavior is a controversial issue within the publicebate. Corporal punishment is defined as the use of physical force with the intention of causing physical pain, but not
njury, for purposes of correction or control of a child’s behavior (Straus, 2010). Many families (Gracia & Herrero, 2008a) androfessionals (Schenck, Lyman, & Bodin, 2000; Straus, Larzelere, & Rosemond, 1994) from different countries and culturalontexts (see the work by Gracia & Herrero, 2008b) strongly support the use of corporal punishment, although many ofhe reasons to perform it, such as its effectiveness or harmlessness, have been shown to be myths (Gámez-Guadix, Straus,arrobles, Munoz-Rivas, & Almendros, 2010; Gershoff et al., 2010).
Despite public support for corporal punishment, and even when corporal punishment has shown to improve immediateompliance (Larzelere & Kuhn, 2005), the existing literature indicates that non-abusive physical punishment is relatedo social and psychological problems not only during childhood but also later in life. The relationship between parental
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
panking and antisocial traits and behaviors in children has been demonstrated over the past 50 years (see the seminalork by Sears, Maccoby, & Levin, 1957) by longitudinal studies (for example, see Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997) and
ecent publications (Grogan-Kaylor, 2004, 2005) from various countries (Gershoff et al., 2010), regardless of whether theres positive parenting or psychological aggression related to punishment (Gámez-Guadix et al., 2010). Corporal punishment
has also been related to emotional and behavioral problems (Aucoin, Frick, & Bodin, 2006; Gershoff et al., 2010; Mulvaney& Mebert, 2007), the restricted development of cognitive ability (Straus & Paschall, 2009), detrimental effects on braindevelopment (Sheu, Polcari, Anderson, & Teicher, 2010; Tomoda et al., 2009), and other psychosocial problems for both theindividual child and the society as a whole (see Straus, 2000). For a review of the harmful effects of corporal punishment, themeta-analysis by Gershoff (2002) revealed 93% agreement on these effects from over 300 studies included. Another meta-analysis by Paolucci and Violato (2004) suggested a small negative relationship between exposure to corporal punishmentand affective, cognitive, and behavioral functioning.
There are a number of specific characteristics that have been reported to be associated with families who tend to usecorporal punishment, such as the male gender of the child (Abolfotouh, El-Bourgy, Seif El Din, & Mehanna, 2009; Malhi &Ray, 2004; Straus & Stewart, 1999); the personalities of the child and the mother (Latzman, Elkovitch, & Clark, 2009; Towe-Goodman & Teti, 2008); a young parental age (Combs-Orme & Cain, 2008; Dietz, 2000; Giles-Sims, Straus, & Sugarman,1995), especially related to the chronicity of corporal punishment (Straus & Stewart, 1999); the religion of the family (Flynn,1994), with Catholics presenting a lower use of spanking (Giles-Sims et al., 1995); a low educational level among parents(Abolfotouh et al., 2009; Dietz, 2000; Flynn, 1994; Malhi & Ray, 2004); low family income (Abolfotouh et al., 2009; Dietz,2000; Flynn, 1994; Giles-Sims et al., 1995; Hahleg, Heinrichs, Bertram, Kuschel, & Widdecke, 2008; Straus & Stewart, 1999);a large number of children in the family (Abolfotouh et al., 2009; Flynn, 1994); the rural origin of parents (Abolfotouhet al., 2009; Giles-Sims et al., 1995); poor inter-parental relationships, including spousal violence and separated or divorcedparents (Abolfotouh et al., 2009; Xu, Tung, & Dunaway, 2000); unmarried mothers (Giles-Sims et al., 1995); stress, mentalhealth and substance abuse among parents (Cabrera, González, & Guevara, 2012; Lee, Perron, Taylor, & Guterman, 2011);and especially having been exposed to corporal punishment or physical abuse and verbal hostility as children (Abolfotouhet al., 2009; Chung et al., 2009; Gagné, Tourigny, Joly, & Pouliot-Lapointe, 2007).
Although research has shown higher rates of violent childrearing for several types of children and families (Straus &Stewart, 1999), only a few studies have related corporal punishment to family structure (Cain & Combs-Orme, 2005; Mitchel,2008; Nobes & Smith, 2002). Family structure can be defined as the internal composition of the family, the number ofpeople who comprise the family, the relationships that exist between family members, the parents’ marital status and theresponsibility of the parents in raising children (Del Ángel-Castillo & Torres, 2008). It is recognized that understanding familystructure allows the understanding of the composition and the course of family life and the relationship between familystructure and the psychological well-being of its members (Acosta, 2003; Zeiders, Roosa, & Tein, 2011) in order to guidepolicymaking.
In this sense, the emergence of new family models in Latin America has become a reality as a result of economic andpolitical adjustments and social changes that have occurred worldwide (Ariza & De Oliveira, 2006; Del Ángel-Castillo & Torres,2008). Demographic, socioeconomic, and cultural changes that have occurred in Latin American societies have affected thestructure, organization and internal dynamics of families (Ariza & De Oliveira, 2004). For example, in the last decade, therehas been a decrease in the prevalence of nuclear families in Latin America (Sunkel, 2006) and a reduction in the averagesize of the family. Quiroz (2001) suggested that early motherhood and marital breakdowns have been increasing. Becauseculture has shown to make a difference in determining attitudes about corporal punishment (Douglas, 2006), additionalresearch is needed to explain the differences in corporal punishment according to child, maternal, and family characteristicsin Latin American countries such as Colombia.
There is only one study that has analyzed the prevalence of corporal punishment in Colombian families, from the city ofMedellín, with more than half of the families interviewed reporting mild corporal punishment (included spanking, hitting,or slapping with a bare hand; hitting or slapping on the hand, arm, or leg; shaking; or hitting with an object) (Lansfordet al., 2010). However, the sample was too restricted to generalize the results to other areas of the country. The NationalDemographic and Health Survey (2000) from Colombia suggests that mothers tend to punish their children more often thanfathers do. For mothers, 47% of them spank and 36% slap their children. For fathers and stepfathers, 42% of them spank and27% slap their children and/or stepchildren. However, no scientific studies have been published that link the use of corporalpunishment to the family structures of Colombian families.
Therefore, the purpose of this article is to expand the limited results found on corporal punishment in Colombia, providingdetails about the actual occurrence of corporal punishment in a rural area and its relation to family structure and other socio-demographic variables, such as parental age, the number of children in the family, parental education, parental occupation,marital status, and child age and gender, thus contributing to a broader understanding of the subject in Latin America.
Method
Participants
The sample consisted of 620 parents of children aged between 5 and 8 years old (45% girls) from a rural area north ofBogotá, Colombia. We chose this age range because the use of corporal punishment by parents reaches its highest peak
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
during the end of the preschool and childhood years and decreases thereafter (Lansford et al., 2010; Straus & Stewart, 1999).Additionally, having a sample of children under 12 years old allowed us to compare the prevalence of corporal punishmentin our sample with other studies of Latin American countries that used similar age ranges, including the studies by Gavinand Smith (2002), Day, Peterson, and McCracken (1998), and Straus (2010).
Not working 25 4.4 10 2.3Working from home 147 25.5 30 6.9
* Partner refers to information on the partner who did not complete the survey.
Most participants were mothers (77%). Half of the respondents lived together without a legal marriage, 28% were legallyarried, 20% were single and 2% were divorced. Notably, nearly half of the mothers were younger than 30 years of age, andost achieved secondary studies and worked as regular employees. Table 1 shows the distribution of the overall sample
ccording to the parent’s age, the highest level of education achieved by the parent (graded between 1 and 5, where 1ndicated no studies at all, and 5 indicated the university level) and the parent’s current occupation.
rocedure
The sample was randomly selected from eight public schools from a rural area near Bogotá. After informed consent wasbtained from each parent, data were collected from school–parent meetings by two of the authors of the research and eightssistants (psychology undergraduate students) who were previously trained in the application of the survey. The interviewequired approximately 20 min, and the survey was answered by the mother, the father and if both parents were present,ne of them answered the survey. The confidentiality of the data was assured.
onstructs and instruments
A complete survey about childrearing and childcare was developed for this study. The survey inquired about socio-emographic data and consisted of questions about parental age, living arrangements, marital status, education level,mployment status, and information regarding the child and the child’s father. A specific question about corporal punishmentas included based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) by Straus and colleagues (Straus, 1979; Straus, Hamby, Boeny-McCoy,
Sugarman, 1996). The question was formulated as follows: “I correct my children with physical punishment (e.g., pushed,rabbed or stabbed the child; threw something at him or her; pinched him or her; slapped or spanked my son/daughter on theand, arm, leg or bottom; hit him/her on the bottom with something like a belt, hairbrush, a stick, or some other hard object).”
Family structure was defined by Osorio and Álvarez (2004) as an organization that establishes rules hierarchically,istributes power and defines family roles. In addition, Castillo and Torres (2008) added the need for cohabitation andarenthood to this definition. The authors defined family structures “in terms of their internal composition, the number ofembers that integrate each model and their relationship, the marital status of the parents, and if there is the responsibility
f raising of children” (p. 404). We used both definitions as the theoretical basis of this research.Based on previous literature, in this study, the ‘nuclear family’ is one constituted by parents and their children; it is also
nown as a two-parent or traditional family. A ‘single parent’ (female or male) family is constituted by one parent and childrenCastano, 2002). An ‘extended family’ is composed of people from two or three generations of one family (one or both parentsiving with children, uncles, aunts, cousins, etc.), which generates interactional processes that resemble those described forxtended families consisting of three generations (grandparents, parents, and children) in terms of communication, authoritynd compliance of the care and socialization functions, especially in families with young children. A ‘simultaneous family’s described as one in which one or both parents have children from previous relationships and now the couple lives with
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
heir own children and/or stepchildren. This situation is commonly known as ‘your children, my children and ours’ (Gómez,001). Finally, a ‘composed family’ is made up of two or more families that are not linked together by blood ties; however,ohabitation leads to sharing relationships and processes of internal dynamics, and this type of family is usually constitutedecause of economic reasons (Agudelo, 2005).
Occupation (employee)Independent 0.45 1.44 1.57Working from home −0.48 2.39 0.62Number of children at home 0.59** 4.06 1.80Partner gender −1.5** 6.20 0.22Partner age −0.44** 3.87 0.65Partner education level 0.17 0.80 1.19
Family structure (single mother)Nuclear 0.59** 4.56 1.81Extended 0.77 1.47 2.17
Note: The categories in parentheses are the indicator categories for the regression.** p < 0.1.* p < 0.05.
Data analysis
Data were analyzed with PASW Statistics 18 and STATA 12.
Results
Family structure and the prevalence of corporal punishment
The ‘nuclear family’ was the most prevalent structure in this sample (38%), followed by ‘single mother’ families (28%)and ‘extended families’ (26%). Other family structures made up <3% of this sample and were therefore excluded from theanalysis.
Effect of sociodemographic variables on corporal punishment
To determine if the use of corporal punishment could be explained by socio-demographic variables, we made a logisticregression in which the sex of the parent that answered the survey, his or her marital status, maximum education levelachieved, current occupation and age were introduced as control variables. We also introduced the age and gender of theson or daughter, the number of children under 18 years old that lived in the home, three types of family structures (nuclear,single mother and extended), the age and gender of the partner, the maximum education level achieved by the partner andthe current occupation of the partner.
As shown in Table 2, family structure has a significant effect on corporal punishment. In this regression, we used thesingle-mother family as our reference category, and we found that the nuclear family structure has a statistically significantdifference from the single-mother family structure, showing that parents from nuclear families use corporal punishmentmore than single mothers do.
It is also evident that the number of children living in the home is a predictor of the use of corporal punishment; specif-ically, when the partner is male and young, the use of this type of punishment in the respondent increases. The rest of thevariables do not contribute to predicting the use of corporal punishment in this sample.
Discussion
The purpose of this research was to expand the findings on corporal punishment in Colombia through the analysis of its
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
occurrence and its relation to family structure and other socio-demographic variables.The prevalence of corporal punishment in this sample was 41%. The research conducted by Straus (2010) with
non-epidemiological university samples showed that for Latin American countries, the reported prevalence of corporalpunishment before the age of 12 was 65.7% in Mexico, 28.1% in Venezuela, and 19.4% in Brazil. Based on our results, rural
olombian children tend to experience high degrees of corporal punishment, which may have negative outcomes for thesehildren in long term (Gershoff, 2002).
The relationship between family structure and the use of corporal punishment has remained largely understudied, andnly a limited group of studies have attempted to examine this relationship, often with contradictory findings (Mitchel,008). Previous studies have indicated that corporal punishment is associated with single parenthood due to the high stressf parenting and lower incomes compared to a two-parent home (Giles-Sims et al., 1995). However, other studies contradicthis claim. For example, the studies by Mitchel (2008) and Nobes and Smith (2002) suggested that mothers were moreikely to engage in corporal punishment when they lived with the father or in a multigenerational family. Following theesults obtained by Mitchel (2005, 2008) and Nobes and Smith (2002), our research indicated a greater presence of corporalunishment in the nuclear family (38%) than in the other family structures.
Buitrago-Pena, Guevara-Jiménez, and Cabrera (2009) reviewed different hypotheses proposed in the literature to explainhese results. The authors suggested that in the presence of the male figure, as is the case in nuclear families, the nego-iation between father and mother regarding their children’s rearing becomes more difficult. This situation can generate
polarization of ideologies and interests on behalf of each parent and therefore cause parental stress or ambivalence inarental authority, which are variables that are highly associated with the use of corporal punishment. Other research hashown that in those nuclear families where a “machismo” culture prevails, as can be found in most rural Colombian families,athers tend to use corporal punishment in regard to correcting male children, a situation that does not necessarily occurn single-mother families (Buitrago-Pena, Guevara-Jiménez, & Cabrera, 2009). Values concerning physical punishment or
greater acceptance of violence by men in general (Gracia & Herrero, 2008b) are other complementary explanations forender differences that may explain our results within nuclear families. Nobes and Smith (2002) also suggested that theumber of parents or the structure of the family is not enough to explain child maltreatment, arguing that poverty, poorental health, and discordant marital relations are possible predictors of this type of conduct.The main results on the socio-demographic variables of this study will be discussed through the implications of the
resence of corporal punishment on the nuclear family structure. The results of our study indicated that the number ofhildren in the home, their ages, the couple’s ages and genders, and the gender of the respondent were predictors of the usef corporal punishment.
In this regard, previous studies support that the prevalence (Abolfotouh et al., 2009; Flynn, 1994) of corporal punishmentncreases with the number of children in the home. According to Straus (2010), when the number of children increases,arents have less time to monitor them and therefore may use corporal punishment as a quick strategy to control theirhildren’s behavior. In addition, a higher number of children is associated with economic and parental stress, which couldead to the use of punitive practices such as corporal punishment (Abolfotouh et al., 2009; Dietz, 2000; Flynn, 1994; Giles-ims et al., 1995; Hahleg et al., 2008; Straus & Stewart, 1999). Additionally, as found in previous studies, the ages of thehildren are a variable that is predictive of the use of corporal punishment, especially when the children are concluding theirreschool phase (Straus, 2010).
Another variable that was predictive of corporal punishment in our study was the age of the partner. In this regard, varioustudies indicate that the younger the parents, the higher the prevalence (Combs-Orme & Cain, 2008; Dietz, 2000; Giles-Simst al., 1995) and chronicity (Straus & Stewart, 1999) of corporal punishment. Although other studies have determinedhat older adults report higher levels of acceptance of corporal punishment (Gracia & Herrero, 2008b), our results areased on the actual use of corporal punishment, not on the report of acceptance. In contrast, the age of the person whonswered the survey was not a significant predictor of corporal punishment (the majority of respondents were women).his could be because under difficult conditions, such as a high number of children at home and the difficulties that resultrom the negotiations and authority issues that frequently occur in nuclear families, the presence of a partner (in thisase, commonly a man) becomes an additional stressful factor, encouraging a woman to use corporal punishment as aesponse to this high level of stress (Nobes & Smith, 2002). In this study, this stress could be related to the number ofhildren in the home and the difficulties that result from the negotiations and authority issues that could occur in nuclearamilies.
Future research should determine which of these explanations is the most accurate by replicating and extending thesendings while addressing the limitations of this study.
onclusions
As a result of this study, we may conclude that it is necessary to work on the development of public policies aimed at therotection of children and at parental education. Accordingly, it is important to develop educational programs for parentsith children in their early childhood and childhood stages to promote positive parenting practices.
Because family structure is predictive of the use of corporal punishment, it is important to educate parents and care-ivers while taking into account the composition or structure of the family in order to create interventions tailored toheir specific needs. In this study, the nuclear family is the structure with the highest prevalence of corporal punishment,
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
eaning that the development of interventions that seek to support parents in child-rearing practices both as a couple ands individuals is required. However, it is important that these programs do not leave other family structures, such as theono-parental and extended family structures, unaddressed, because corporal punishment is also prevalent in these types
Finally, family structure is an important variable in the understanding of corporal punishment, especially in regard tonuclear families that have a large number of children and parents who have started their paternal roles early in life. The resultsof this study should not be assumed as a negative effect of the nuclear family structure, but as a way of understanding thecomplexity of parental interactions that derive from it. In addition, these results should be a starting point in the process ofdeveloping educational programs for families, especially those with a nuclear family structure, which are not only prevalentin Colombia but also in other Latin American nations. Given the widespread use of corporal punishment and the existinggeneralized acceptance of it, educational programs should focus on altering the belief that corporal punishment is necessaryto raise a child. These programs, if targeted at parents with young children, may adopt a preventive approach in order toreduce parental stress and encourage the use of positive parenting practices (Cabrera et al., 2012; Daro & Dodge, 2009). Thechallenge, then, will be to teach parents and caregivers alternative strategies to control their children’s behavior in order toavoid having to resort to the use of corporal punishment (Lansford & Bornstein, 2007).
Over the last few decades, several countries have banned corporal punishment, starting with Sweden in 1979, whichbecame the first country to make spanking by parents illegal (see Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children,2011). The research studies that have been published since its prohibition have shown promising results related to thedeclining support for and practice of corporal punishment (for example, Bussmann, 2004; Bussman, Erthal, & Schroth, 2009;Durrant, 1999; Durrant & Janson, 2005).
Most Latin American societies, however, still lack norms and legislations that respect the dignity and human rights ofchildren and youth in relation to corporal punishment by their parents. Uruguay, Venezuela and Costa Rica became the firstand only Latin American countries to prohibit this violent childrearing practice, passing legislation in 2007 and 2008 (Zolotor& Puzia, 2010).
In spite of the declaration by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child General Comment 8 that clarified‘the right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment’ (2006),banning corporal punishment remains a particular challenge in Colombia, where it continues to be used with great frequency.There are some laws that refer to violence against underage minors or maltreatment in Colombia, but none of these lawsrefers specifically to corporal punishment. Because individual, familial and societal variables have shown to be related tothe use of corporal punishment (Straus, 2010), we hope that this article provides some useful knowledge and tools forundertaking this important challenge.
Limitations of the study
It should be taken into account that the sample in this study has some specific characteristics, such as the origin ofparents from a rural Colombian area, which may explain the results (Abolfotouh et al., 2009; Giles-Sims et al., 1995) andlimit the generalization of our conclusions. Additionally, the limitations of self-reporting when asking individuals about thecommission of violent behaviors should be considered; however, other authors have stated that caregivers generally provideinformation that is adequate and comparable to self-reports from their children about violent experiences (Finkelhor, Hamby,Ormrod, & Turner, 2005).
References
Abolfotouh, M. A., El-Bourgy, M. D., Seif El Din, A. G., & Mehanna, A. A. (2009). Corporal punishment: Mother’s disciplinary behavior and child’s psychologicalprofile in Alexandria, Egypt. Journal of Forensic Nursing, 5, 5–17.
Acosta, F. (2003). La familia en los estudios de población en América Latina: Estado del conocimiento y necesidades de investigación. Papeles de Población,37(9), 1–44.
Agudelo, M. E. (2005). Descripción de la Dinámica interna de las familias monoparentales, simultáneas, extendidas y compuestas del municipio de Medellín,vinculadas al proyecto de prevención temprana de la agresión. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Ninez y Juventud, 3(1), 1–19.
Aucoin, K. J., Frick, P. J., & Bodin, S. D. (2006). Corporal punishment and child adjustment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27, 527–541.Ariza, M., & De Oliveira, O. (2004). Familias, pobreza y necesidades de políticas públicas en México y Centroamérica. Santiago de Chile: Naciones Unidas.
Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).Ariza, M., & De Oliveira, O. (2006). Regímenes sociodemográficos y estructura familiar: Los escenarios cambiantes de los hogares mexicanos. Estudios
Sociológicos, 24(1), 3–30.Buitrago-Pena, M., Guevara-Jiménez, M., & Cabrera, K. A. (2009). Las representaciones sociales de género y castigo y su incidencia en la corrección de los
hijos. Educación y Educadores, 12(3), 53–71.Bussmann, K. D. (2004). Evaluating the subtle impact of a ban on corporal punishment of children in Germany. Child Abuse Review, 13, 292–311.Bussman, K. D., Erthal, C., & Schroth, A. (2009). The effect of banning corporal punishment in Europe: A five-nation comparison. Germany: Martin-Luther-
Universität Halle-Wittenberg.Cabrera, V., González, M., & Guevara, I. (2012). Estrés parental, trato rudo y monitoreo como factores asociados al comportamiento agresivo. Universitas
Psychologica, 11(1), 657–670.Cain, D., & Combs-Orme, T. (2005). Family structure effects on parenting stress and practices in the African American family. Journal of Sociology and Social
Welfare, 32(2), 19–40.Castano, L. F. (2002). Funciones y estructura de 15 familias monoparentales con jefatura masculina. Colombia: Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana. Unpublished
Master’s Thesis.
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
Castillo, M., & Torres, M. (2008). The lack of academic achievement in the new family structure models. Universitas Psychologica, 7(2), 403–409.Chung, E. K., Mathew, L., Rothkopf, A. C., Elo, I. T., Coyne, J. C., & Culhane, J. F. (2009). Parenting attitudes and infant spanking: The influence of childhood
experiences. Pediatrics, 124(2), e278–e286.Combs-Orme, T., & Cain, D. S. (2008). Predictors of mothers’ use of spanking with their infants. Child Abuse & Neglect, 32, 649–657.Daro, D., & Dodge, K. A. (2009). Creating community responsibility for child protection: Possibilities and challenges. Future of Child, 19, 67–97.
ay, R., Peterson, G., & McCracken, C. (1998). Predicting spanking of younger and older children by mothers and fathers. Journal of Marriage and Family,60(1), 79–94.
el Ángel-Castillo, M. C., & Torres, M. (2008). The lack of academic achievement in the new family structure models. Universitas Psychologica, 7(2), 403–409.ietz, T. L. (2000). Disciplining children: Characteristics associated with the use of corporal punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(12), 1529–1542.ouglas, E. M. (2006). Familial violence socialization in childhood and later life approval of corporal punishment: A cross-cultural perspective. American
Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(1), 23–30.urrant, J. E. (1999). Evaluating the success of Sweden’s corporal punishment ban. Child Abuse & Neglect, 23(5), 435–448.urrant, J. E., & Janson, S. (2005). Law reform, corporal punishment and child abuse: The case of Sweden. International Review of Victimology, 12(2), 139–158.inkelhor, D., Hamby, S. L., Ormrod, R., & Turner, H. (2005). The Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire: Reliability, validity, and national norms. Child Abuse
& Neglect, 29, 383–412.lynn, C. P. (1994). Regional differences in attitudes toward corporal punishment. Journal of Marriage & The Family, 56(2), 314–324.agné, M.-H., Tourigny, M., Joly, J., & Pouliot-Lapointe, J. (2007). Predictors of adult attitudes toward corporal punishment of children. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 22(10), 1285–1304.ámez-Guadix, M., Straus, M. A., Carrobles, J. A., Munoz-Rivas, M., & Almendros, C. (2010). Corporal punishment and long-term behavior problems: The
moderating role of positive parenting and psychological aggression. Psicothema, 22(4), 529–536.avin, N., & Smith, M. (2002). Structure and the physical punishment of children. Journal of Family Issues, 23(3), 349–373.ershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and experiences: A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological
Bulletin, 128, 539–579.ershoff, E. T., Grogan-Kaylor, A., Lansford, J. E., Chang, L., Zelli, A., Deater-Deckard, K., & Dodge, K. A. (2010). Parent discipline practices in an international
sample: Associations with child behaviors and moderation by perceived normativeness. Child Development, 81(2), 487–502.iles-Sims, J., Straus, M. A., & Sugarman, D. B. (1995). Child, maternal, and family characteristics associated with spanking. Family Relations, 44(2), 170–176.ómez, M. A. (2001). Cumplimiento de las tareas y dificultades del ciclo vital en las familias simultáneas del área metropolitana. Colombia: Universidad Pontificia
Bolivariana. Unpublished Master’s Thesis.lobal Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children. (2011). Research in countries which have prohibited all corporal punishment. Retrieved September
20, 2011 from http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/frame.htmlracia, E., & Herrero, J. (2008a). Beliefs in the necessity of corporal punishment of children and public perceptions of child physical abuse as a social problem.
Child Abuse & Neglect, 32, 1058–1062.racia, E., & Herrero, J. (2008b). Is it considered violence? The acceptability of physical punishment of children in Europe. Journal of Marriage and Family,
70, 210–217.rogan-Kaylor, A. (2004). The effect of corporal punishment on antisocial behavior in children. Social Work Research, 28(3), 153–162.rogan-Kaylor, A. (2005). Corporal punishment and the growth trajectory of children’s antisocial behavior. Child Maltreatment, 10(3), 283–292.ahleg, K., Heinrichs, N., Bertram, H., Kuschel, A., & Widdecke, N. (2008). Körperliche Bestrafung: Prävalenz und Einfluss auf die psychische Entwicklung bei
Vorschulkindern [Corporal punishment: Prevalence and impact on psychological development of preschool children]. Kindheit und Entwicklung, 17(1),46–56.
ansford, J. E., & Bornstein, M. H. (2007). Review of parenting programs in developing countries. New York: UNICEF.ansford, J. E., Alampay, L., Al-Hassan, S., Bacchini, D., Silvia Bombi, A., Bornstein, M. H., Chang, L., Deater-Deckard, K., Di Giunta, L., Dodge, K., Oburu, P.,
Pastorelli, C., Runyan, D., Skinner, A., Sorbring, E., Tapanya, S., Uribe, L., & Zelli, A. (2010). Corporal punishment of children in nine countries as a functionof child gender and parent gender. International Journal of Pediatrics, 1–12.
arzelere, R. E., & Kuhn, B. R. (2005). Comparing child outcomes of physical punishment and alternative disciplinary tactics: A meta-analysis. Clinical Childand Family Psychology Review, 8(1), 1–37.
atzman, R. D., Elkovitch, N., & Clark, L. A. (2009). Predicting parenting practices from maternal and adolescent sons’ personality. Journal of Research inPersonality, 43, 847–855.
ee, S. J., Perron, B. E., Taylor, C. A., & Guterman, N. B. (2011). Paternal psychosocial characteristics and corporal punishment of their 3-year-old children.Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(1), 71–87.
alhi, P., & Ray, M. (2004). Prevalence and correlates of corporal punishment among adolescents. Studia Psychologica, 46(3), 219–228.itchel, L. B. (2005). Family structure and use of corporal punishment by low income mothers. Berkeley: University of California. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation.itchel, L. B. (2008). Corporal punishment and low-income mothers: The role of family structure, race, and class in America. Amherst, NY: Cambria Press.ulvaney, M. K., & Mebert, C. J. (2007). Parental corporal punishment predicts behavior problems in early childhood. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(3),
389–397.ational Demographic and Health Survey (Encuesta Nacional de Demografía y Salud [ENDS] (2000). Salud sexual y reproductiva en Colombia. Profamilia.
[http://www.profamilia.org.co/encuestas/Profamilia/Profamilia/index.php?option=com content&view=article&id=74&Itemid=334]sorio, A., & Álvarez, A. (2004). Módulo Introducción a la salud familiar. Curso especial de posgrado en gestión local de salud Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social
Centro de Desarrollo Estratégico e Información en Salud y Seguridad Social (CENDEISSS). Universidad de Costa Rica.obes, G., & Smith, M. (2002). Family structure and the physical punishment of children. Journal of Family Issues, 23(3), 349–373.aolucci, E. O., & Violato, C. (2004). A meta-analysis of the published research on the affective, cognitive, and behavioral effects of corporal punishment.
The Journal of Psychology, 138(3), 197–222.uiroz, M. (2001). La matriz familiar en la era de la “mundialización”. Revista venezolana de análisis de coyuntura, 1, 73–94.ears, R. R., Maccoby, E. E., & Levin, H. (1957). Patterns of child rearing. Oxford, England: Row, Peterson and Co.chenck, E. R., Lyman, R. D., & Bodin, S. D. (2000). Ethical beliefs, attitudes, and professional practices of psychologists regarding parental use of corporal
punishment: A survey. Children’s Services: Social Policy, Research, and Practice, 3(1), 23–38.heu, Y.-S., Polcari, A., Anderson, C. M., & Teicher, M. H. (2010). Harsh corporal punishment is associated with increased t2 relaxation time in dopamine-rich
regions. Neuroimage, 53(2), 412–419.traus, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. Journal of Marriage and Family, 41, 75–88.traus, M. A. (2000). Corporal punishment by parents: The cradle of violence in the family and society. The Virginia Journal of Social Policy the Law, 8(1),
9–60.traus, M. A. (2010). Prevalence, societal causes and trends in corporal punishment by parents in world perspective. Law and Contemporary Problems, 73,
1–30.traus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boeny-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2). Development and preliminary psychometric
data. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), 283–316.traus, M. A., Larzelere, R. E., & Rosemond, J. K. (1994). Should the use of corporal punishment by parents be considered child abuse? In M. A. Mason, & E.
Gambrill (Eds.), Debating children’s lives: Current controversies on children and adolescents. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.traus, M. A., & Paschall, M. J. (2009). The effects of corporal punishment: Corporal punishment by mothers and development of chil-
dren’s cognitive ability–a longitudinal study of two nationally representative age cohorts. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 18,
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
459–483.traus, M. A., & Stewart, J. H. (1999). Corporal punishment by American parents: National data on prevalence, chronicity, severity, and duration, in relation
to child and family characteristics. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 2(2), 55–70.traus, M. A., Sugarman, D. B., & Giles-Sims, J. (1997). Spanking by parents and subsequent antisocial behavior of children. Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent
Sunkel, G. (2006). El papel de la familia en la protección social en América Latina. Serie Políticas Sociales. CEPAL. Naciones Unidas.Tomoda, A., Suzuki, H., Rabi, K., Sheu, Y.-S., Polcari, A., & Teicher, M. H. (2009). Reduced prefrontal cortical gray matter volume in young adults exposed to
harsh corporal punishment. NeuroImage, 47(Suppl. 2), T66–T71.Towe-Goodman, N., & Teti, D. M. (2008). Power assertive discipline, maternal emotional involvement, and child adjustment. Journal of Family Psychology,
22, 648–651.United Nations. (2006). GENERAL COMMENT No. 8. The right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel or degrading forms of punishment
(arts. 19; 28, para. 2; and 37, inter alia). Geneva: Committee on the Rights of the Child.
Please cite this article in press as: González, M. R., et al. Corporal punishment in rural Colombianfamilies: Prevalence, family structure and socio-demographic variables. Child Abuse & Neglect (2013),http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.006
Xu, X., Tung, Y.-Y., & Dunaway, R. G. (2000). Cultural, human and social capital as determinants of corporal punishment: Toward and integrated theoreticalmodel. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15(6), 603–630.
Zeiders, K. H., Roosa, M. W., & Tein, J. Y. (2011). Family structure and family processes in Mexican-American families. Family Process, 50, 77–91.Zolotor, A. J., & Puzia, M. E. (2010). Bans against corporal punishment: A systematic review of the laws, changes in attitudes and behaviours. Child Abuse
