Meta-analysis of 88 studies found spanking had ten adverse outcomes and one benefit

Evidence

The answer, when it came in 2002, was clear in its pattern and stark in its implications. The accumulated evidence across eighty-eight studies showed that corporal punishment was associated with one beneficial outcome — immediate compliance, the child stopping the behavior in the moment — and ten adverse outcomes including reduced moral internalization, increased aggression, increased antisocial behavior, damaged parent-child relationships, reduced mental health, and increased risk of physical abuse. — , The Rod and the Child, 9559

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Spanking produces immediate compliance but no other desirable outcome. — , The Rod and the Child: A Global History…, 6331; Even the momentary compliance benefit of spanking vanished under the narrow definition — , The Rod and the Child: A Global History…, 6458; Spanking’s harms persist across all ages, sexes, races, and study designs — , The Rod and the Child: A Global History…, 6472 (+10 more)

Related

• Longitudinal, neuroimaging, and genetic designs independently confirmed spanking’s adverse effects (similarity 0.90)
• Spanking produces immediate compliance but no other desirable outcome. (similarity 0.90)
• Spanking’s harms persist across all ages, sexes, races, and study designs (similarity 0.90)
• A 75-study meta-analysis ties child corporal correction to aggression and lower cognition. (similarity 0.89)
• Even the momentary compliance benefit of spanking vanished under the narrow definition (similarity 0.86)
• Spanking undermines internalized moral development while producing surface obedience. (similarity 0.85)
• Spanking persists because its benefit is salient while its harm is statistical. (similarity 0.84)
• Frequent childhood spanking independently predicts adult aggression (similarity 0.84)
• Corporal punishment harms children’s brains through the same mechanisms as physical abuse. (similarity 0.83)
• Corporal punishment impairs the very self-regulation it aims to build. (similarity 0.83)
• Spanking alone produces the same neural threat responses as severe physical abuse (similarity 0.81)
• Corporal punishment’s harm joined smoking and lead exposure as settled consensus (similarity 0.81)
• Corporal punishment predicts harmful outcomes in every studied culture including Kenya (similarity 0.81)
• Harsh physical punishment alone predicts elevated odds of adult psychiatric disorders (similarity 0.80)
• The 2002 meta-analysis pooled mild and severe physical punishment under one broad definition (similarity 0.80)

Broader Connections

• Early spanking predicts later aggression even after controlling for baseline behavior #corroborates (0.80) — , The Rod and the Child, 10307
• Frequent childhood spanking independently predicts adult aggression #corroborates (0.70) — , The Rod and the Child, 9788
• A 75-study meta-analysis ties child corporal correction to aggression and lower cognition. #corroborates (0.65) — , The Rod and the Child, 5716
• Spanking alone produces the same neural threat responses as severe physical abuse #expands (0.60) — , The Rod and the Child, 10247
• Spanked children show the same threat-response neural pattern as abused children. #expands (0.60) — , The Rod and the Child, 6224
• Corporal punishment predicts harmful outcomes in every studied culture including Kenya #expands (0.60) — , The Rod and the Child, 4499
• Spanking undermines internalized moral development while producing surface obedience. #expands (0.55) — , The Rod and the Child, 6332
• Spanking frequency predicts the likelihood of escalating to abusive force. #expands (0.50) — , The Rod and the Child, 6648
• Corporal punishment’s harm joined smoking and lead exposure as settled consensus #qualifies (0.45) — , The Rod and the Child, 6748