On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On 20 Dec 2006, 0:- wrote:
.....snip......


Compare them, for instance, to Dr. Embry's program he tested with
considerable success and his claim yet again, with citations of other's
more specific work, that his experience was that children do indeed,
when spanked, move to preform the unwanted behavior MORE.

He said that it is RARE - not normal! A fact that anti-spanking zealotS
like you have been deliberately omitted, "lying by omission" by your
standard!
Did he now?

R R R R R sure, Doan the Screeching Hysterical Childish Monkeyboy.

From Nathan's post quoting Dr. Embry:

" It would have been nearly impossible to have detected the fact that
spanking, scolding and reprimands served as "accidental attention to
dangerous behavior" except by a repeated measures, with 10-second
coding. That said, about a third of the kids had this effect, and they
were the ones that people often want to spank; that is, because these
were the kids, post-hoc, that would likely meet the definition of
oppositionally defiant in today's vernacular of the DSM-IV. The
prevalence of this DSM-IV diagnoses are clearly rising for a whole lot
of reasons that have nothing to do with parenting, yet
parenting/teacher behavior can seriously worse the biological
and socially induced predispositions.

For these kids, spanking, etc. did not meet the operant definition of a
punisher; rather, it met the definition of reinforcement. This is whole
consistent with the long-term, precision studies of the etiology of
multi-problem kids (see the book by Anthony Biglan et al. Helping
Adolescents at At Risk, from Guilford Press). Dr. Biglan is my close
colleague and the president of the society for prevention research. Dr.