Predictors of Adult Attitudes Toward Corporal Punishment of Children
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study identifies predictors of favorable attitudes toward spanking. Analyses were performed with survey data collected from a representative sample of 1,000 adults from Quebec, Canada. According to this survey, a majority of respondents endorsed spanking, despite their recognition of potential harm associated with corporal punishment (CP) of children. The prediction model of attitudes toward spanking included demographics, experiencing or witnessing various forms of family violence and abuse in childhood, and perceived frequency of physical injuries resulting from CP. Spanking was the most reported childhood experience (66.4%), and most violence and abuse predictors were significantly and positively correlated. Older respondents who were spanked in childhood and who believed that spanking never or seldom results in physical injuries were the most in favor of spanking. On the other hand, respondents who reported more severe physical violence or psychological abuse in childhood were less in favor of spanking. Findings are discussed in terms of prevention of CP and family coercion cycle.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it