Moral Disengagement and the Propensity to Endorse Physical Punishment Practices
- 440 Downloads
In this study, a new measure of moral disengagement tailored to physical punishment was developed. Moral disengagement is the selective disengagement of moral standards so that in certain situations unacceptable behavior can be performed without anticipatory self-censure for engaging in such conduct. In order to comprehensively examine the social cognitive process of moral disengagement, this study also investigates whether individuals who endorse higher levels of moral disengagement intend to use more physical punishment, and anticipate feeling less self-censure for using physical punishment. Participants were 323 primarily White Australian college students (46% male). Factor analyses supported a one-factor solution for the physical punishment moral disengagement scale, and the scale was shown to possess good psychometric properties. In accordance with predictions from social cognitive theory, greater moral disengagement proneness was associated with increased intentions to use physical punishment. Further, greater moral disengagement proneness was associated with less anticipated self-censure for using physical punishment. The results from this study provide preliminary evidence demonstrating that selective disengagement from moral standards is associated with greater intentions to use physical punishment.
KeywordsMoral disengagement Physical punishment Corporal punishment Discipline Social cognitive theory
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
- Allison, P. D. (2001). Missing data: Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative applications in the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2011). Census of population and housing. http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au.
- Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms of moral disengagement. In W. Reich (Ed.), Origins of terrorism: Psychologies, ideologies, theologies, states of mind (pp. 161–191). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. In W. M. Kurtines, & J. L. Gerirtz (Eds.), Handbook of moral behavior and development (pp. 45–103). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Vol. 1.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A. (2004). The role of selective moral disengagement in terrorism and counterterrorism. In F. M. Moghaddam, & A. J. Marsella (Eds.), Understanding terrorism: Psychosocial roots, consequences, and interventions (pp. 121–150). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Committee on the Rights of the Child. (2006). General comment number 8. The Right of the child to protection from corporal punishment and other cruel and degrading forms of punishment. Geneva: UNICEF.Google Scholar
- duRivage, N., Keyes, K., Leray, E., Pez, O., Bitfoi, A., Koç, C., et al. (2015). Parental use of corporal punishment in Europe: Intersection between public health and policy. PLoS ONE, 10, e0118059–e0118070. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118059.
- Gershoff, E. T. (2013a). Hitting close to home: Teaching about spanking. In D. S. Dunn, R. A. R. Gurung, K. Z. Naufel, & J. H. Wilson (Eds.), Controversy in the psychology classroom: Using hot topics to foster critical thinking (pp. 65–80). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gershoff, E. T., & Bitensky, S. H. (2007). The case against corporal punishment of children: Converging evidence from social science research and international human rights law and implications for US public policy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13, 231–272. doi: 10.1037/1076-89184.108.40.206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Holden, G. W., & Buck, M. J. (2002). Parental attitudes toward child rearing. In M. H. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting (pp. 537–562, 2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Vol. 3.Google Scholar
- Lansford, J. E., Deater-Deckard, K., Bornstein, M. H., Putnick, D. L., & Bradley, R. H. (2014). Attitudes justifying domestic violence predict endorsement of corporal punishment and physical and psychological aggression towards children: A study in 25 low- and middle-income countries. The Journal of Pediatrics, 164, 1208–1213. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.11.060.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- MacKenzie, M. J., Nicklas, E., Waldfogel, J., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2012). Corporal punishment and child behavioural and cognitive outcomes through 5 years of age: Evidence from a contemporary urban birth cohort study. Infant and Child Development, 21, 3–33. doi: 10.1002/icd.758.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Straus, 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, 55–70. doi: 10.1023/A:1021891529770.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- UNICEF. (2005). Convention on the rights of the child. http://www.unicef.org/crc/index_30229.html.
- Wodarski, J. S. (2015). Assessment methods. In S. Cook, M. J. Holosko, & M. D. Feit (Eds.), Evidence-informed assessment and practice in child welfare (pp. 99–121). Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar