If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
Nathan, an aside, since Doan has gone to lying to you, by lying about me. His claim is that the Embry study is not about spanking. This has gone on for years between us. Try reading the truth: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...230d568?hl=en& This post clarifies exactly what is in the Embry report on this issue of spanking. Embry did indeed refer to it and code for it in the instructions to his observers. Doan is a stone liar of some considerable skill. This is an extract straight out of the post I've given the link to above: Doan wrote: Yup! And get this, the Embry study has nothing to do with spanking at all. He has been lying about it all along. He is caught in a lie and now trying very hard to extricate himself. Doan [[[ My response ]]] From page 23, instructions to the six (with the author making the seventh) observers. Item 11. Parental Use of Punishment. If the parent used force (pulling, pushing, squeezing hard, or HITTING)[emphasis mine] as a consequence for a child's play in the street during an interval (of observation), the observers coded this force as "PUNISHMENT." [emphasis mine again]. I'd say "hitting" falls under "spanking" descriptively. YMMV So Doan, the study "has nothing to do with spanking at all?" ...... Get it yet, Doan? You lied, you compounded your lies many times, and are doing so again now. Anyone interested in the history of this resurrected nonsense of Doan's is invited to read the central post that showed clearly that he was lying then, thus lying now. http://www.talkaboutparenting.com/gr...panking/messag... He does this periodically as a way to harass rather than debate. Harassment is what he is about, not information, not logical argument, nothing but monkeyboy tricks. 0:- ... end of extract from post ... Unless of course, if Doan wants to play the spanking is not hitting game again. The observers and the researcher would have to, likely as mandatory reporters, report any "hitting" that did not qualify as "spanking" or our more common term here, CP. He lies at every turn. One makes a mistake and admits it, even providing proof of his own error, (ask him about the Hutterites) and Doan continues to claim the original error was a lie. That itself is a lie. Best wishes, Kane |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
Nathan, an aside, since Doan has gone to lying to you, by lying about me.
Hihihi! People who are regulars on this newsgroup knows who the liar is. His claim is that the Embry study is not about spanking. Yes. Why don't you post the data on spanking, Kane? I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU? It is simple to prove if I am lying or not, Kane. Just post the data on spanking from the study, if you can. Doan This has gone on for years between us. Try reading the truth: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...230d568?hl=en& This post clarifies exactly what is in the Embry report on this issue of spanking. Embry did indeed refer to it and code for it in the instructions to his observers. Doan is a stone liar of some considerable skill. This is an extract straight out of the post I've given the link to above: Doan wrote: Yup! And get this, the Embry study has nothing to do with spanking at all. He has been lying about it all along. He is caught in a lie and now trying very hard to extricate himself. Doan [[[ My response ]]] From page 23, instructions to the six (with the author making the seventh) observers. Item 11. Parental Use of Punishment. If the parent used force (pulling, pushing, squeezing hard, or HITTING)[emphasis mine] as a consequence for a child's play in the street during an interval (of observation), the observers coded this force as "PUNISHMENT." [emphasis mine again]. I'd say "hitting" falls under "spanking" descriptively. YMMV So Doan, the study "has nothing to do with spanking at all?" ..... Get it yet, Doan? You lied, you compounded your lies many times, and are doing so again now. Anyone interested in the history of this resurrected nonsense of Doan's is invited to read the central post that showed clearly that he was lying then, thus lying now. http://www.talkaboutparenting.com/gr...panking/messag... He does this periodically as a way to harass rather than debate. Harassment is what he is about, not information, not logical argument, nothing but monkeyboy tricks. 0:- ... end of extract from post ... Unless of course, if Doan wants to play the spanking is not hitting game again. The observers and the researcher would have to, likely as mandatory reporters, report any "hitting" that did not qualify as "spanking" or our more common term here, CP. He lies at every turn. One makes a mistake and admits it, even providing proof of his own error, (ask him about the Hutterites) and Doan continues to claim the original error was a lie. That itself is a lie. Best wishes, Kane |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, Doan wrote:
Nathan, an aside, since Doan has gone to lying to you, by lying about me. His claim is that the Embry study is not about spanking. This has gone on for years between us. Try reading the truth: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...230d568?hl=en& This post clarifies exactly what is in the Embry report on this issue of spanking. Embry did indeed refer to it and code for it in the instructions to his observers. Doan is a stone liar of some considerable skill. This is an extract straight out of the post I've given the link to above: Doan wrote: Yup! And get this, the Embry study has nothing to do with spanking at all. He has been lying about it all along. He is caught in a lie and now trying very hard to extricate himself. Doan [[[ My response ]]] From page 23, instructions to the six (with the author making the seventh) observers. Item 11. Parental Use of Punishment. If the parent used force (pulling, pushing, squeezing hard, or HITTING)[emphasis mine] as a consequence for a child's play in the street during an interval (of observation), the observers coded this force as "PUNISHMENT." [emphasis mine again]. I'd say "hitting" falls under "spanking" descriptively. YMMV So Doan, the study "has nothing to do with spanking at all?" ..... Get it yet, Doan? You lied, you compounded your lies many times, and are doing so again now. Hihihi! You are exposing your STUPIDITY again, Kane. You once again proved that you are incapable of reading and understanding a simple chart, let alone the whole study. Let me explain it to you in simple term, IT IS an ITEM. GOT IT? So if there aren't any data under this ITEM, or not enough date under this ITEM, the item is not going to be use in the analysis part of the study. GOT IT NOW, STUPID??? The analysis regarding street entries was done with "reprimands" "Figure 7 shows the probability of observed children receiving a reprimand from parents six intervals preceding or following an entry into the street. ... Thus, reprimand met the criterion for a reinforcer during baseline BUT NOT DURING INTERVENTION." IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SPANKING! Doan |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
Doan wrote:
Nathan, an aside, since Doan has gone to lying to you, by lying about me. Hihihi! People who are regulars on this newsgroup knows who the liar is. Sure they do. It's Doan and has been for years. His claim is that the Embry study is not about spanking. Yes. Why don't you post the data on spanking, Kane? I DARE YOU! I DOUBLE DARE YOU? It is simple to prove if I am lying or not, Kane. Just post the data on spanking from the study, if you can. The description of the Item, Punishment, includes "hitting." What about hitting would you say is not CP, Doan? Punishment was coded for observation recording, and in fact was tracked. Non-CP was tracked as "Reprimands," Doan. Learn to read a simple report. And try to argue without lying. All Nathan, or anyone has to do is read the quoted post material below to see how you lied. 0:-] Doan This has gone on for years between us. Try reading the truth: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...230d568?hl=en& This post clarifies exactly what is in the Embry report on this issue of spanking. Embry did indeed refer to it and code for it in the instructions to his observers. Doan is a stone liar of some considerable skill. This is an extract straight out of the post I've given the link to above: Doan wrote: Yup! And get this, the Embry study has nothing to do with spanking at all. He has been lying about it all along. He is caught in a lie and now trying very hard to extricate himself. Doan [[[ My response ]]] From page 23, instructions to the six (with the author making the seventh) observers. Item 11. Parental Use of Punishment. If the parent used force (pulling, pushing, squeezing hard, or HITTING)[emphasis mine] as a consequence for a child's play in the street during an interval (of observation), the observers coded this force as "PUNISHMENT." [emphasis mine again]. I'd say "hitting" falls under "spanking" descriptively. YMMV So Doan, the study "has nothing to do with spanking at all?" ..... Get it yet, Doan? You lied, you compounded your lies many times, and are doing so again now. Anyone interested in the history of this resurrected nonsense of Doan's is invited to read the central post that showed clearly that he was lying then, thus lying now. http://www.talkaboutparenting.com/gr...panking/messag... He does this periodically as a way to harass rather than debate. Harassment is what he is about, not information, not logical argument, nothing but monkeyboy tricks. 0:- ... end of extract from post ... Unless of course, if Doan wants to play the spanking is not hitting game again. The observers and the researcher would have to, likely as mandatory reporters, report any "hitting" that did not qualify as "spanking" or our more common term here, CP. He lies at every turn. One makes a mistake and admits it, even providing proof of his own error, (ask him about the Hutterites) and Doan continues to claim the original error was a lie. That itself is a lie. Best wishes, Kane |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Teenagers faced with spankings
Doan wrote:
On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, Doan wrote: Nathan, an aside, since Doan has gone to lying to you, by lying about me. His claim is that the Embry study is not about spanking. This has gone on for years between us. Try reading the truth: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...230d568?hl=en& This post clarifies exactly what is in the Embry report on this issue of spanking. Embry did indeed refer to it and code for it in the instructions to his observers. Doan is a stone liar of some considerable skill. This is an extract straight out of the post I've given the link to above: Doan wrote: Yup! And get this, the Embry study has nothing to do with spanking at all. He has been lying about it all along. He is caught in a lie and now trying very hard to extricate himself. Doan [[[ My response ]]] From page 23, instructions to the six (with the author making the seventh) observers. Item 11. Parental Use of Punishment. If the parent used force (pulling, pushing, squeezing hard, or HITTING)[emphasis mine] as a consequence for a child's play in the street during an interval (of observation), the observers coded this force as "PUNISHMENT." [emphasis mine again]. I'd say "hitting" falls under "spanking" descriptively. YMMV So Doan, the study "has nothing to do with spanking at all?" ..... Get it yet, Doan? You lied, you compounded your lies many times, and are doing so again now. Now watch Doan go into FWM. (Full Weasel Mode). Hihihi! You are exposing your STUPIDITY again, Kane. You once again proved that you are incapable of reading and understanding a simple chart, let alone the whole study. Let me explain it to you in simple term, IT IS an ITEM. GOT IT? Sure. You are mislabeling. It is described as one of a list of 'behaviors.' Not an item. Behaviors are tracked by the study. Punishment is the item, and the description is of the behaviors classified by Embry as "Punishment." One of those is "hitting." So if there aren't any data under this ITEM, or not enough date under this ITEM, the item is not going to be use in the analysis part of the study. GOT IT NOW, STUPID??? It was tracked, recorded, and reported as "Punishment." It was used so little (2 times recorded) that there is no comparison being made, nor was this a "comparison" study, Doan. Still having language problems? The analysis regarding street entries was done with "reprimands" The analysis was also done with punishment, according to YOU, stupid. Or have you now decided that....snort....Time Out Instruction is not Punishment....you know, the Sit and Watch "punishment?" R R R R R R The reason there are no charts tracking "Punishment," stupid, is exactly what you claim....there was not enough OF it to show that it effected the behavior of the child visa vis Street Entries. Thus, the LACK OF PUNISHMENT and the use of positive methods were being compared. One factored OUT the other. Just as I have claimed since this discussion began. Punishment was tracked. It was used less because of the training in non-punitive methods that were applied. Your original question was for one of us non-spanking advocates to provide proof that non-punitive methods worked as well or better than spanking, CP. Well? QED. "Figure 7 shows the probability of observed children receiving a reprimand from parents six intervals preceding or following an entry into the street. ... Thus, reprimand met the criterion for a reinforcer during baseline BUT NOT DURING INTERVENTION." IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SPANKING! Because spanking was shown to not work. It wasn't a study to COMPARE, and that's not what you asked for originally. Show us a spanking study, Doan, that has similar or better results than this study where spanking apparently was not used by many parents...as only two incidences are mentioned. That would be, at best, if it was not just one parent, only 10% of the demographic. Doan Where is that spanking study, Doan? Or try weaseling some more. It's fun watching you dodge back and forth trying desperately to avoid exposure as a liar and fool. 0:-] |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Teenagers faced with spankings | fistoffury | Spanking | 165 | December 20th 06 06:11 PM |
Teenagers faced with spankings | Greegor | Foster Parents | 23 | December 17th 06 07:31 PM |
Teenagers faced with spankings | Doan | Spanking | 13 | December 13th 06 01:35 PM |
More Teenagers Seek Help From Psychiatrists | Jan | Kids Health | 29 | April 23rd 06 05:53 PM |