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
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
"While some may find it strange that reprimands might increase the chances of a child going into the street, the literature on the experimental analysis of behavior is replete with examples of how "attention to inappropriate behavior" increases the chances of more inappropriate behavior. Thus, suggestions to parents that they talk to or reason with their children about dashing into the street will likely to have the opposite impact. Reprimands do not punish unsafe behavior; they reward it." Source: "Reducing the Risk of Pedestrian Accidents to Preschoolers by Parent Training and Symbolic Modeling for Children: An Experimental Analysis in the Natural Environment. Research Report Number 2 of the Safe-Playing Project." Inter-Library Loan #: 73216 So when you little toddler dash into the street, remember not to talk or reason with him/her about it! ;-) Doan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
...
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:39:22 -0800, Doan wrote:
"While some may find it strange that reprimands might increase the chances of a child going into the street, the literature on the experimental analysis of behavior is replete with examples of how "attention to inappropriate behavior" increases the chances of more inappropriate behavior. Thus, suggestions to parents that they talk to or reason with their children about dashing into the street will likely to have the opposite impact. Reprimands do not punish unsafe behavior; they reward it." Of course that is true. However, you fail to note that spanking also increases the rate of children going into the street according to Embry. A little honesty would be nice Doan. Note that most of those who advocate for non-spanking do not advocate scolding, reprimanding, or nagging either. I would say that there are much better ways of keeping children from going into the street (depending on the age of the child involved, different methods will be used). The most important part of parenting is catching them being good and giving them attention when their behavior is appropriate. Stating your rules in positive terms is also good. "Hold hands near the street:" "Walk on the sidewalk." "Cross streets at the corner after looking both ways." All of these are reasonable ways of defining the rules for children. Then praise them when they do the right thing. It works much better than punishment *after* the fact anyway. Prevention is much better than punishment of any kind. http://www.neverhitachild.org/embry.html "Spanking... increases the rate of street entries by children", wrote Dr. Dennis Embry in a letter to Children Magazine. Since 1977 I have been heading up the only long-term project designed to counteract pedestrian accidents to preschool-aged children. (Surprisingly, getting struck by a car is about the third leading cause of death to young children in the United States.) Actual observation of parents and children shows that spanking, scolding, reprimanding and nagging INCREASES the rate of street entries by children. Children use going into the street as a near-perfect way to gain parents' attention. Now there is a promising new educational intervention program, called Safe Playing. The underlying principles of the program are simple: 1. Define safe boundaries in a POSITIVE way. 'Safe players play on the grass or sidewalk.' 2. Give stickers for safe play. That makes it more fun than playing dangerously. 3. Praise your child for safe play. These three principles have an almost instant effect on increasing safe play. We have observed children who had been spanked many times a day for going into the street, yet they continued to do it. The moment the family began giving stickers and praise for safe play, the children stopped going into the street. Dennis D. Embry, Ph.D. University of Kansas Lawrence Kansas -- Dorothy There is no sound, no cry in all the world that can be heard unless someone listens .. The Outer Limits |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
toto wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:39:22 -0800, Doan wrote: "While some may find it strange that reprimands might increase the chances of a child going into the street, the literature on the experimental analysis of behavior is replete with examples of how "attention to inappropriate behavior" increases the chances of more inappropriate behavior. Thus, suggestions to parents that they talk to or reason with their children about dashing into the street will likely to have the opposite impact. Reprimands do not punish unsafe behavior; they reward it." Of course that is true. However, you fail to note that spanking also increases the rate of children going into the street according to Embry. A little honesty would be nice Doan. Note that most of those who advocate for non-spanking do not advocate scolding, reprimanding, or nagging either. I would say that there are much better ways of keeping children from going into the street (depending on the age of the child involved, different methods will be used). The most important part of parenting is catching them being good and giving them attention when their behavior is appropriate. Stating your rules in positive terms is also good. "Hold hands near the street:" "Walk on the sidewalk." "Cross streets at the corner after looking both ways." All of these are reasonable ways of defining the rules for children. Then praise them when they do the right thing. It works much better than punishment *after* the fact anyway. Prevention is much better than punishment of any kind. A key part of his study, the one under discussion, was that children below a certain age might well be endangered by trying to teach 'safe crossing.' I fully agree. The point of the study (and why the older children were left out of the "baseline observed" group of 13 families, about 25 persons) was that the program was about seeing if simple avoidance of the street could be taught successfully. At six months they still had good results, so there was some validity. Embry, however, did NOT stop there or make claims they now had a perfect way to teach children to stay out of the street. At best it was a direction to look, and for others to test by replication. Such experiments were done by others, and the replications produced similar results. That put the bow on the package. There is a NZ study using Embry's program was a key one in that replication. It was done as part of a master thesis and it was much more heavily documented. At least the pile of paper is thicker. The point you make about spanking increasing the unwanted behavior is well taken, and prove again and again. If a child stops the behavior, under 3 or four years of age, it's out of terror when the parent is present. Those children STILL do the unwanted behavior at a higher rate, when the parent is absent. If the parent has to BE there, then the parent can supervise, as they should with children that young. Onother important finding in the experiment was the the rate of parental supervision went UP after the program was activated. Not bad. And of course, totally in line with reality for keeping very young children safe in play by roadways. http://www.neverhitachild.org/embry.html "Spanking... increases the rate of street entries by children", wrote Dr. Dennis Embry in a letter to Children Magazine. Since 1977 I have been heading up the only long-term project designed to counteract pedestrian accidents to preschool-aged children. (Surprisingly, getting struck by a car is about the third leading cause of death to young children in the United States.) Actual observation of parents and children shows that spanking, scolding, reprimanding and nagging INCREASES the rate of street entries by children. Children use going into the street as a near-perfect way to gain parents' attention. Now there is a promising new educational intervention program, called Safe Playing. The underlying principles of the program are simple: 1. Define safe boundaries in a POSITIVE way. 'Safe players play on the grass or sidewalk.' 2. Give stickers for safe play. That makes it more fun than playing dangerously. 3. Praise your child for safe play. These three principles have an almost instant effect on increasing safe play. We have observed children who had been spanked many times a day for going into the street, yet they continued to do it. The moment the family began giving stickers and praise for safe play, the children stopped going into the street. Dennis D. Embry, Ph.D. University of Kansas Lawrence Kansas -- Dorothy Yep. And Doan has this before many times. He just choses, like a fool, and self important twit, to ignore it. Embry would not LIE about this. He himself thought, before he started getting results from his study and work in this field, that spanking was a good tool to teach children to stay out of roadways. No one paid him to lie about it. He simply is reporting what others have found as well. The truth. There is no sound, no cry in all the world that can be heard unless someone listens .. The Outer Limits Thanks for your input. Stick around. Doan's about to make a complete fool of himself yet again. By the way, do you have access to a copy of the study? Suddenly it's just turning up everywhere, according to Doan, after being impossible to find for many years. 0:- Kane -- Isn't it interesting that the more honest an author appears to be, the more like ourselves we think him. And the less so, how very alien he doth appear? Kane 2006 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, toto wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:39:22 -0800, Doan wrote: "While some may find it strange that reprimands might increase the chances of a child going into the street, the literature on the experimental analysis of behavior is replete with examples of how "attention to inappropriate behavior" increases the chances of more inappropriate behavior. Thus, suggestions to parents that they talk to or reason with their children about dashing into the street will likely to have the opposite impact. Reprimands do not punish unsafe behavior; they reward it." Of course that is true. However, you fail to note that spanking also increases the rate of children going into the street according to Embry. A little honesty would be nice Doan. Honestly, I was looking for such data from the study but found none! Now if anyone on the anti-spanking side is honest, please read the study and SHOW ME the support data. I will be glad to send you a copy of this study or point you to where you can get one. Note that most of those who advocate for non-spanking do not advocate scolding, reprimanding, or nagging either. But some do, e.g Hauser "Swedish parents now discipline their children; and in doing so, they rely on a variety of alternatives to physical punishment. The method most commonly used is _verbal_conflict_resolution_, which invites parents as well as children to express their anger in words. Parents insist that discussions involve constant eye contact, even if this means taking firm hold of young children to engage their attention. Parents and professionals agree that discussions may escalate into yelling, or that yelling may be a necessary trigger for discussion. Still, many point out that while yelling may be humiliating, it is better than ignoring the problem or containing the anger, and it is usually less humiliating than physical punishment." I would say that there are much better ways of keeping children from going into the street (depending on the age of the child involved, different methods will be used). The most important part of parenting is catching them being good and giving them attention when their behavior is appropriate. Stating your rules in positive terms is also good. "Hold hands near the street:" "Walk on the sidewalk." "Cross streets at the corner after looking both ways." All of these are reasonable ways of defining the rules for children. Then praise them when they do the right thing. It works much better than punishment *after* the fact anyway. Prevention is much better than punishment of any kind. According to Embry, it's a combination of reward (stickers) and punishment (time-out). http://www.neverhitachild.org/embry.html "Spanking... increases the rate of street entries by children", wrote Dr. Dennis Embry in a letter to Children Magazine. Since 1977 I have been heading up the only long-term project designed to counteract pedestrian accidents to preschool-aged children. (Surprisingly, getting struck by a car is about the third leading cause of death to young children in the United States.) Actual observation of parents and children shows that spanking, scolding, reprimanding and nagging INCREASES the rate of street entries by children. Children use going into the street as a near-perfect way to gain parents' attention. Now there is a promising new educational intervention program, called Safe Playing. The underlying principles of the program are simple: 1. Define safe boundaries in a POSITIVE way. 'Safe players play on the grass or sidewalk.' 2. Give stickers for safe play. That makes it more fun than playing dangerously. 3. Praise your child for safe play. These three principles have an almost instant effect on increasing safe play. We have observed children who had been spanked many times a day for going into the street, yet they continued to do it. The moment the family began giving stickers and praise for safe play, the children stopped going into the street. Dennis D. Embry, Ph.D. University of Kansas Lawrence Kansas Like I said, I was hoping to find supporting data from the actual study but found NONE! Perhaps someone on the anti-spanking can show me. I'll even provide a copy of the study. ANY TAKER? Doan |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote:
toto wrote: On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 12:39:22 -0800, Doan wrote: "While some may find it strange that reprimands might increase the chances of a child going into the street, the literature on the experimental analysis of behavior is replete with examples of how "attention to inappropriate behavior" increases the chances of more inappropriate behavior. Thus, suggestions to parents that they talk to or reason with their children about dashing into the street will likely to have the opposite impact. Reprimands do not punish unsafe behavior; they reward it." Of course that is true. However, you fail to note that spanking also increases the rate of children going into the street according to Embry. A little honesty would be nice Doan. Note that most of those who advocate for non-spanking do not advocate scolding, reprimanding, or nagging either. I would say that there are much better ways of keeping children from going into the street (depending on the age of the child involved, different methods will be used). The most important part of parenting is catching them being good and giving them attention when their behavior is appropriate. Stating your rules in positive terms is also good. "Hold hands near the street:" "Walk on the sidewalk." "Cross streets at the corner after looking both ways." All of these are reasonable ways of defining the rules for children. Then praise them when they do the right thing. It works much better than punishment *after* the fact anyway. Prevention is much better than punishment of any kind. A key part of his study, the one under discussion, was that children below a certain age might well be endangered by trying to teach 'safe crossing.' I fully agree. The point of the study (and why the older children were left out of the "baseline observed" group of 13 families, about 25 persons) was that the program was about seeing if simple avoidance of the street could be taught successfully. At six months they still had good results, so there was some validity. Embry, however, did NOT stop there or make claims they now had a perfect way to teach children to stay out of the street. At best it was a direction to look, and for others to test by replication. Such experiments were done by others, and the replications produced similar results. That put the bow on the package. There is a NZ study using Embry's program was a key one in that replication. It was done as part of a master thesis and it was much more heavily documented. At least the pile of paper is thicker. The point you make about spanking increasing the unwanted behavior is well taken, and prove again and again. If a child stops the behavior, under 3 or four years of age, it's out of terror when the parent is present. Those children STILL do the unwanted behavior at a higher rate, when the parent is absent. If the parent has to BE there, then the parent can supervise, as they should with children that young. Onother important finding in the experiment was the the rate of parental supervision went UP after the program was activated. Not bad. And of course, totally in line with reality for keeping very young children safe in play by roadways. http://www.neverhitachild.org/embry.html "Spanking... increases the rate of street entries by children", wrote Dr. Dennis Embry in a letter to Children Magazine. Since 1977 I have been heading up the only long-term project designed to counteract pedestrian accidents to preschool-aged children. (Surprisingly, getting struck by a car is about the third leading cause of death to young children in the United States.) Actual observation of parents and children shows that spanking, scolding, reprimanding and nagging INCREASES the rate of street entries by children. Children use going into the street as a near-perfect way to gain parents' attention. Now there is a promising new educational intervention program, called Safe Playing. The underlying principles of the program are simple: 1. Define safe boundaries in a POSITIVE way. 'Safe players play on the grass or sidewalk.' 2. Give stickers for safe play. That makes it more fun than playing dangerously. 3. Praise your child for safe play. These three principles have an almost instant effect on increasing safe play. We have observed children who had been spanked many times a day for going into the street, yet they continued to do it. The moment the family began giving stickers and praise for safe play, the children stopped going into the street. Dennis D. Embry, Ph.D. University of Kansas Lawrence Kansas -- Dorothy Yep. And Doan has this before many times. He just choses, like a fool, and self important twit, to ignore it. Embry would not LIE about this. He himself thought, before he started getting results from his study and work in this field, that spanking was a good tool to teach children to stay out of roadways. No one paid him to lie about it. He simply is reporting what others have found as well. The truth. How about providing supporting data, Kane. You have the study, SHOW ME THE MONEY! ;-) Doan |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
I don't recall this post being in response to you.
You recall the conditions, right? You blew all rights to debate with me with your silly childish games. And likely a lot of lying. My bet? You just got the study and have been lying all this time. Go away, little boy. Yah bother me. . Yer demanding style in that post just amounts to harassment and you know about harassment from you, right? ... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
LOL! So I am right about this study. Come on, Kane! This is a public
forum. STOP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF! ;-) Doan On 13 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote: I don't recall this post being in response to you. You recall the conditions, right? You blew all rights to debate with me with your silly childish games. And likely a lot of lying. My bet? You just got the study and have been lying all this time. Go away, little boy. Yah bother me. . Yer demanding style in that post just amounts to harassment and you know about harassment from you, right? .. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
Doan wrote: LOL! So I am right about this study. Come on, Kane! This is a public forum. STOP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF! ;-) Doan You made a fool of yourself when you continually lied, Doan. And refused to debate but claimed you had the study. All you had to do was prove and you would't. What do you suppose that looks like to any reader? Yes, this certainly IS a public forum. And I'm free to do as I wish. I told you that the deadline had come and offered you chances. You refused them. My bet is because you could not admit you didn't have the study at that time. Suddenly now you are willing to debate? R R R R R Child. Nuisance. Harasser. Fool. That's all you are. 0:- |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The Embry Study: What it actually said.
On 14 Feb 2006, 0:- wrote:
Doan wrote: LOL! So I am right about this study. Come on, Kane! This is a public forum. STOP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF! ;-) Doan You made a fool of yourself when you continually lied, Doan. And refused to debate but claimed you had the study. All you had to do was prove and you would't. So now you accused of being a liar, WITHOUT PROOF! ;-) Here is your chance to prove it to the public, Kane. Prove it to everyone that what I claimed about this study is FALSE! Can you do it? You said you have the study in fron of you. Show me the data as it pertains to spanking and street entries. YOU CAN'T BECAUSE IT AIN'T THERE! ;-) Thus, I CAN AND DID PUBLICLY ACCUSED YOU AS A LIAR WHEN YOU SAID: "Pretty remarkable when one considers that parents who spanked before had children that attemped entries at the highest rate of all per hour." Now since this is a public forum, you can chose to defend yourself by submitting data from the study to backup such claim and PROVE to everyone that I am liar. You can also chose to keep quiet and hope that no one noticed. You can also start throwing adhom at me and make a fool of yourself again. THE CHOICE IS YOURS! ;-) What do you suppose that looks like to any reader? That I chose to ignore you! ;-) Yes, this certainly IS a public forum. And I'm free to do as I wish. I told you that the deadline had come and offered you chances. You refused them. My bet is because you could not admit you didn't have the study at that time. Suddenly now you are willing to debate? R R R R R Child. Nuisance. Harasser. Fool. That's all you are. And ignoranus kane0 is who you are and your mom are proud of you! ;-) Doan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Classic Droan was R R R R, should I DOUBLE DARE HIM? ..was... LaVonne | Kane | Spanking | 0 | April 17th 04 07:13 PM |
Kids should work... | Doan | Spanking | 33 | December 10th 03 08:05 PM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Spanking | 12 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Foster Parents | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
Kids should work... | Doan | Foster Parents | 31 | December 7th 03 03:01 AM |