Does parental use of harsh discipline and punishment in response to ambiguous child situations vary by child physical abuse risk?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The present study investigated the extent to which fathers and mothers at high-risk and low-risk for child physical abuse (CPA) differed in their use of harsh discipline and punishment when presented ambiguous child situations (situations where differences in positive and negative valences are close to zero).

PARTICIPANTS/METHODS

High-risk for CPA parents (N = 74: fathers, n = 41; mothers, n = 33) and low-risk parents (N = 178: fathers, n = 91; mothers, n = 87) were asked to indicate their likelihood of using harsh verbal discipline (HVD), harsh physical discipline (HPD), and punishment (i.e., retributive harm separate from HVD and HPD) after viewing each of eighteen ambiguous child situations.

RESULTS

As expected, high-risk, compared to low-risk, for CPA parents were significantly (ps < 0.001) more likely to use HVD (d = 0.546), HPD (d = 0.595), and punishment (d = 0.564). Overall, fathers, relative to mothers, were significantly more likely to use HVD (d = 0.261) and HPD (d = 0.238). For punishment, however, there was no significant parental role (father, mother) difference (d = 0.136).

CONCLUSIONS

Since in everyday living situations many child behaviors are ambiguous, the findings that parents, especially high-risk for CPA parents, use harsh discipline and punishment when encountering ambiguous child situations suggest that non-contingent harsh child-related parental behaviors may be frequent in the lives of some children. The findings that parents may use non-contingent discipline and punishment suggest the need to explore whether, when these parenting behaviors occur, they increase the likelihood of negative child outcomes.

Moral Injury, Betrayal and Retribution: Australian Veterans and the Role of Chaplains

This paper presents additional qualitative results from Phase 1 of a larger study examining potentially morally injurious events/experiences (PMIE) and/or moral injury (MI) among Australian veterans (Hodgson et al. in J Relig Health 60(5):3061-3089, 2021). It makes specific reference to (1) betrayal and (2) retribution experienced or perpetrated by Australian military veterans during military conflicts and peacekeeping missions. During two veteran seminars conducted in Adelaide, South Australia, a total of 50 veterans were recruited, 10 of whom were willing to be interviewed and audio-recorded about their deployment experiences. Narrative data analysis of veteran transcripts indicated that all participants had engaged in or were exposed to a PMIE/MI of one kind or another, and all had experienced betrayal and/or witnessed or perpetrated retribution. Given the ethical, moral and spiritual issues involved, the role of chaplains in addressing moral injury for the benefit of veterans through the use of 'Pastoral Narrative Disclosure' (PND) is suggested-with a specific focus upon 'restoration' and 'ritual'. Additional research is recommended with regard to acts of betrayal and retribution among veterans, as well as the further development of PND to address PMIE/MI.

Debunking (the) Retribution (Gap)

Robotization is an increasingly pervasive feature of our lives. Robots with high degrees of autonomy may cause harm, yet in sufficiently complex systems neither the robots nor the human developers may be candidates for moral blame. John Danaher has recently argued that this may lead to a retribution gap, where the human desire for retribution faces a lack of appropriate subjects for retributive blame. The potential social and moral implications of a retribution gap are considerable. I argue that the retributive intuitions that feed into retribution gaps are best understood as deontological intuitions. I apply a debunking argument for deontological intuitions in order to show that retributive intuitions cannot be used to justify retributive punishment in cases of robot harm without clear candidates for blame. The fundamental moral question thus becomes what we ought to do with these retributive intuitions, given that they do not justify retribution. I draw a parallel from recent work on implicit biases to make a case for taking moral responsibility for retributive intuitions. In the same way that we can exert some form of control over our unwanted implicit biases, we can and should do so for unjustified retributive intuitions in cases of robot harm.

Behavioral explanations reduce retributive punishment but not reward: The mediating role of conscious will

Conceptions of responsibility are associated with the degree to which people ascribe conscious will to others. However, it is not known how the biological and environmental circumstances of moral actors independently impact attributions of conscious will. Although reductions in conscious will are associated with diminished punishment of criminals, does a reduced sense of conscious will of a hero affect support for reward? In two pre-registered studies (total N = 2668), we investigated the effects of biological or environmental histories on judgements of punishment and reward. Biological and environmental circumstances (especially biological) reduced perceptions of conscious will, which in turn reduced conviction judgements and punishment severity (Studies 1-2). In the context of a moderated mediation, we found that reductions in perceptions of conscious will were unrelated for a desire to reward a hero (Study 2). Findings are discussed in the context of a model of judgement, conscious will, and responsibility.

Memory Interventions in the Criminal Justice System: Some Practical Ethical Considerations

In recent years, discussion around memory modification interventions has gained attention. However, discussion around the use of memory interventions in the criminal justice system has been mostly absent. In this paper we start by highlighting the importance memory has for human well-being and personal identity, as well as its role within the criminal forensic setting; in particular, for claiming and accepting legal responsibility, for moral learning, and for retribution. We provide examples of memory interventions that are currently available for medical purposes, but that in the future could be used in the forensic setting to modify criminal offenders' memories. In this section we contrast the cases of (1) dampening and (2) enhancing memories of criminal offenders. We then present from a pragmatic approach some pressing ethical issues associated with these types of memory interventions. The paper ends up highlighting how these pragmatic considerations can help establish ethically justified criteria regarding the possibility of interventions aimed at modifying criminal offenders' memories.

Judging the goring ox: retribution directed toward animals

Prior research on the psychology of retribution is complicated by the difficulty of separating retributive and general deterrence motives when studying human offenders (Study 1). We isolate retribution by investigating judgments about punishing animals, which allows us to remove general deterrence from consideration. Studies 2 and 3 document a "victim identity" effect, such that the greater the perceived loss from a violent animal attack, the greater the belief that the culprit deserves to be killed. Study 3 documents a "targeted punishment" effect, such that the responsive killing of the actual "guilty" culprit is seen as more deserved than the killing of an almost identical yet "innocent" animal from the same species. Studies 4 and 5 extend both effects to participants' acceptance of inflicting pain and suffering on the offending animal at the time of its death, and show that both effects are mediated by measures of retributive sentiment, and not by consequentialist concerns.

High outgroup entitativity can inhibit intergroup retribution

Understanding the psychological processes that are involved in the perpetuation and escalation of intergroup conflict remains an important goal for intergroup relations research. In the present research, we examined perceived outgroup entitativity as a potential determinant of intergroup hostility. In intergroup conflict situations, high-entitative outgroups are perceived as particularly deserving of retribution; however, high-entitative outgroups are also perceived as efficacious and capable of retaliating successfully, suggesting that people may inhibit hostility against high-entitative (vs. low-entitative) outgroups that are in a position to retaliate. We tested this prediction in two studies. In Study 1, we manipulated intergroup provocation and outgroup entitativity, and found that higher negative mood predicted greater aggression against a low-entitative provoker outgroup, but failed to predict aggression against a high-entitative provoker outgroup that was plausibly in a position to retaliate. In Study 2, we held provocation constant while manipulating outgroup entitativity and the possibility of retaliation by the outgroup, and found that people acted in a retributive manner against a high-entitative provoker outgroup only when the outgroup was not in a position to retaliate. Implications for intergroup conflict are discussed.