Physically Violent Parental Practices: A Cross-Cultural Study in Cameroon, Switzerland, and Togo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Violence against children and adolescents is a widespread problem. However, most studies conducted in this field has been carried out in Western countries and studies are needed in non-Western countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, where rates of child physical violence are high. The present study aimed firstly to document the different forms of physical violence and attitudes toward corporal punishment (CP) across Cameroon, Switzerland, and Togo. The second objective aimed, on the one hand, to understand the influence of cultural context, childhood physical abuse, and parental attitudes on physically violent parental practices in these three different cultural contexts. On the other, this study aimed to investigate the mediating role of childhood physical abuse and parental attitudes on the effect of cultural contexts on parental practices. Five hundred and forty-seven parents from Togo, Cameroon, and Switzerland filled out questionnaires concerning violent parental practices (ICAST-P), childhood physical abuse (CTQ-SF), and parental attitudes in favor of CP. Firstly, results highlighted some cultural differences regarding parental attitudes and practices. Secondly, the hierarchical regression showed that physical violence could be partially predicted by the cultural context, childhood abuse, and attitudes in favor of CP. Finally, childhood abuse and parental attitudes mediated the link between the cultural context and parental practices. This study underscores the importance of considering the cultural context when examining parental practices. Moreover, these results provide a better understanding of these types of parental practices in less studied contexts.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".