In a longitudinal study, McLoyd and Smith used participants who had been measured in 1979 as having received corporal punishment or not and now, they looking at those who had children of their own. To measure the amount a child was spanked, McLoyd and Smith had the mother use self-report data to rank the occurrences of it. As a means of measuring emotional support, the observer did so and based the score on occurrences during the home observation, such as hugs, answering child’s questions, and encouragement of the child. While McLoyd and Smith found what numerous other researchers had, that receiving corporal punishment led to more aggressive behavior later in life, they also found that these effects could be off put by high levels of emotional support. If a child were to receive an emotionally supportive environment McLoyd and Smith claimed they were likely to interpret the situation differently, not viewing the spanking as means of rejection. In other words, context can control how severely an action is …show more content…
I also received low levels of maternal support and affection and more severe forms of corporal punishment. As a fairly grown individual, I feel as though I can see some of the ramifications of receiving said punishment and due to this I hope that I will never resort to inflicting corporal punishment upon my children. Despite the research being fairly ambiguous, I do not believe in non-consensual touching under any circumstance. It was not the research I found on the topic that solidified this stance. Rather it is a moral viewpoint I hold separate to science. Despite someone being young, they still have feelings according to their body, holding a position of power of these people does not give you the right to violate this personal space. There are other methods of getting your message across to developing minds that do not include hurting someone