Pergamon

Child Abuse & Neglect 25 (2001) 413– 419

Brief communication

Relationships among parental beliefs in corporal

punishment, reported stress, and physical child abuse
potential
Julie L. Crouch*, Leah E. Behl
Center for the Study of Family Violence and Sexual Assault, Department of Psychology, Northern Illinois
University, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA

Received 28 March 2000; received in revised form 27 June 2000; accepted 1 July 2000

Abstract
Objective: The present study examined the extent to which parental belief in the value of corporal
punishment moderates the association between level of parenting stress and physical child abuse
potential. Based on existing theory, it was expected that levels of parenting stress would be positively
associated with physical child abuse potential among parents who reported high levels of belief in the
value of corporal punishment.
Method: Forty-one parents (25 general population and 16 at-risk parents) were assessed for belief in the
value of corporal punishment, level of parenting stress, and physical child abuse potential using self-report
measures. After removal of respondents due to response distortion or missing data, the final sample
consisted of 31 parents with valid and complete protocols. Based on their responses on the study measures,
respondents were categorized as either high or low on belief in corporal punishment and parenting stress.
Results: Level of parenting stress was positively associated with physical child abuse potential. As
expected, the interaction of parenting stress and belief in the value of corporal punishment was
significant. Level of parenting stress was positively associated with physical child abuse potential
among parents who reported high levels of belief in the value of corporal punishment. In contrast,
level of parenting stress was not associated with physical child abuse potential among parents who
reported low belief in the value of corporal punishment.
Conclusions: The present findings are consistent social information processing and stress and coping
models of the etiology of physical child abuse, and underscore the importance of considering both
parental cognitions and levels of parenting stress in assessing potential for physical child abuse.
© 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Corporal punishment; Stress; Physical child abuse; Child abuse potential

* Corresponding author.

0145-2134/01/$ – see front matter © 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 1 4 5 - 2 1 3 4 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 2 5 6 - 8
414 J.L. Crouch, L.E. Behl / Child Abuse & Neglect 25 (2001) 413– 419

Introduction

Ecological and transactional models suggest that risk for physical child abuse is best under-
stood as a dynamic construct that represents the confluence of characteristics of the individual, the
family, and the larger social context (Belsky, 1993; Cicchetti & Rizley, 1981). Characteristics of
the parent, such as beliefs related to parenting (e.g., belief in the value of corporal punishment)
as well as patterns of information processing related to child rearing situations (e.g., ability to
integrate situational cues, appropriateness of expectations with regard to child compliance, etc.)
are each thought to be related to risk for physical child abuse (Milner, 1993, 2000).
Situational factors, such as high levels of stress, also may increase risk for a variety of
types of maltreatment, including physical child abuse potential (e.g., Hillson & Kuiper,
1994). Further, under conditions of high stress parents may be more likely to engage in rapid,
automatic information processing (vs. more controlled, flexible processing), which may
increase the influence of basic belief structures on parenting behavior (Milner, 1993, 2000).
Thus, existing theory suggests that stress and beliefs regarding parenting (e.g., belief in the
value of corporal punishment) may interact such that the association between parenting stress
and risk for physical child abuse might vary depending on the parent’s belief in the value of
corporal punishment. To examine this possibility, the present study assessed parents for
belief in the value of corporal punishment, level of parenting stress, and physical child abuse
potential. It was predicted that belief in the value of corporal punishment and level of
parenting stress would interact in predicting physical child abuse potential. More specifically,
it was predicted that among parents with high belief in the value of corporal punishment, but
not among parents with low belief in corporal punishment, level of stress would be positively
associated with physical child abuse potential.

Method

Participants

Participants included in the present analyses took part in a larger study that examined the
impact of instructional conditions on responses to parenting measures (Milner & Crouch,
1997). The larger project involved both general population and at-risk parents. General
population participants included a convenience sample of parents recruited from the com-
munity. At-risk participants were parents who attended group treatment sessions offered by
a secondary prevention program. The prevention program from which parents were recruited
focused on preventing problems in parenting, including physical child abuse. According to
the prevention program staff, 80% of parents enrolled in the treatment groups from which
at-risk parents were recruited were court referred child physical abusers, whereas noncourt
referrals most often involved parents referred by professionals who believed the parent was
at risk for abuse or problems in parenting.
For the purpose of the present analyses, data from 41 parents (25 general population
parents and 16 at-risk parents) who were instructed to respond honestly to the parenting
measures were examined. Of the 41 respondents eligible for inclusion in the present analyses,
 J.L. Crouch, L.E. Behl / Child Abuse & Neglect 25 (2001) 413– 419 415

9 were excluded due to response distortion (i.e., had elevated faking-good indexes on the
Child Abuse Potential Inventory) and 1 was excluded due to missing data. Thus, the final
sample consisted of 31 respondents (22 general population and 9 at-risk parents), 77.8% were
female, and 22.2% were male. Sixty-nine percent of respondents were Caucasian, 20.7%
were Black, 6.9% were Latino, and 3.4% were American Indian. The mean age of respon-
dents was 34.9 years (SD ⫽ 7.4). The mean number of years of education was 14.0 (SD ⫽
2.7). With regard to marital status, 66.7% were married, 18.5% were divorced, 7.4% were
single, 3.7% were separated, and 3.7% were widowed. The mean number of children per
respondent was 2.1 (SD ⫽ 1.0). The children of participants ranged in age from 1 to 18 years,
and the mean age of the first born child of each participant was 10.5 years (SD ⫽ 6.3).

Test instruments

Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory (AAPI) Belief in Corporal Punishment. The AAPI is a

self-report questionnaire that consists of four scales designed to assess attitudes and expectations
related to parenting. The AAPI Belief in Corporal Punishment scale consists of 10 items that were
developed to assess parental attitudes with regard to corporal punishment. Internal consistency of
the AAPI Belief in Corporal Punishment scale has been estimated at .75 (Bavolek, 1984). Several
studies have supported the construct validity of the AAPI scales (see Bavolek, 1989).

Parenting Stress Index (PSI). The PSI is a 101–item self-report measure that was designed
to assess parent-related stress and child-related stress. In the present study a total stress score
was derived by summing the parent-related and child-related stress scores. Internal consis-
tency for the PSI total stress score has been estimated at .95 (Abidin, 1995). A number of
studies provide construct validity data that support the use of the PSI as a measure of stress
related to parenting (see Abidin, 1995).

Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAP). The CAP Inventory is a 160 –item self-report
questionnaire designed to screen for physical child abuse (Milner, 1986, 1994). Internal
consistency estimates for the CAP Physical Abuse scale range from .92 to .95 for general
population, at-risk, and physically abusive groups. The CAP also contains three validity
indexes that were used to detect respondents who were faking-good, faking-bad, or randomly
responding. Previous research has reported that CAP Physical Abuse scores are significantly
associated with later physical child abuse in at-risk parents, and correct classification rates for
physically abusive and matched comparison parents based on CAP Physical Abuse scores
range from 80% to over 90%. Additional information supporting the validity of the CAP
Physical Abuse scale as a measure of physical child abuse potential has been described
elsewhere (see Milner, 1986, 1994).

Procedure

The AAPI, PSI, and CAP were presented in a counter balanced order to general population
and at-risk parents either individually or in small groups. At-risk, but not general population
parents, were paid $10 for their participation. All parents were offered debriefing and
416 J.L. Crouch, L.E. Behl / Child Abuse & Neglect 25 (2001) 413– 419

provided a toll-free number that they could call to obtain more information about the study.
In addition, each participant was provided a preaddressed, prepaid postcard (number coded
to the participant’s data), which the respondent could mail after participation to request that
their questionnaires be removed from the study.

Results

The mean score on the AAPI Belief in Corporal Punishment scale was 34.51 (SD ⫽ 6.75).
The mean PSI total stress score was 237.51 (SD ⫽ 46.26). Median splits were performed on
the distributions for the AAPI Belief in Corporal Punishment scores (cut score ⫽ 35) and PSI
total stress scores (cut score ⫽ 232), allowing for the creation of four groups of parents (nine
parents with low belief in corporal punishment and low stress, seven parents with high belief
in corporal punishment and low stress, eight parents with low belief in corporal punishment
and high stress, and seven parents with high belief in corporal punishment and high stress).
The four parenting groups did not differ with regard to gender, ␹2(3, N ⫽ 31) ⫽ 2.21, p ⬎
.05; age, F(3, 27) ⫽ 1.06, p ⬎ .05; years of education, F(3, 27) ⫽ 2.38, p ⬎ .05; number of
children, F(3, 27) ⫽ 1.09, p ⬎ .05; marital status (coded married vs. other), ␹2(3, N ⫽ 31) ⫽
1.01, p ⬎ .05; or race/ethnicity (coded Caucasian vs. other), ␹2(3, N ⫽ 31) ⫽ 2.84, p ⬎ .05.
Mean CAP Physical Abuse scores for the four parenting groups are presented in Fig. 1.
A 2 (low vs. high belief in corporal punishment) ⫻ 2 (low vs. high level of parenting stress),
between subjects, Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was conducted to examine the associa-
tions between level of belief in corporal punishment, level of reported stress, and CAP
Physical Abuse scores. Results of the ANOVA revealed that the main effect for level of
belief in corporal punishment was not significant, F(1, 27) ⫽ 2.29, p ⬎ .05. The main effect
of level of reported stress was significant, F(1, 27) ⫽ 10.65, p ⬍ .01. More specifically,
parents with high levels of reported stress, compared to parents with low levels of reported
stress, obtained significantly higher CAP scores. As expected the interaction of the level of
belief in corporal punishment and level of reported parenting stress was significant, F(1,
27) ⫽ 4.45, p ⬍ .05. The pattern of the interaction indicated that the association between
level of stress and CAP Physical Abuse scores varied depending on the level of belief in
corporal punishment. Among parents who reported a high belief in corporal punishment,
parents with high levels of parenting stress (M ⫽ 212.71, SD ⫽ 104.38), compared to parents
with low levels of parenting stress (M ⫽ 60.71, SD ⫽ 24.19), obtained significantly higher
CAP Physical Abuse scores, F(1, 12) ⫽ 14.08, p ⬍ .01. Among parents who reported low
levels of belief in corporal punishment, level of parenting stress was not significantly related
to CAP Physical Abuse scores (high stress, M ⫽ 110.25, SD ⫽ 86.21; low stress, M ⫽ 77.56,
SD ⫽ 74.75), F(1, 15) ⫽ .70, p ⬎ .05.

Discussion

Consistent with theory (e.g., Hillson & Kuiper, 1994; Milner, 1993, 2000) and previous
research (Abidin, 1995), level of stress related to parenting was significantly associated with
 J.L. Crouch, L.E. Behl / Child Abuse & Neglect 25 (2001) 413– 419 417

Fig. 1. Mean CAP Physical Abuse scores for parents who reported low belief in corporal punishment/low stress,
low belief in corporal punishment/high stress, high belief in corporal punishment/low stress, and high belief in
corporal punishment/high stress.

physical child abuse potential. Results from the present study, however, suggest that the
association between stress and physical child abuse potential may be moderated by the
parents’ level of belief in the value of corporal punishment. Among parents who strongly
believed in the value of corporal punishment, level of stress was positively associated with
physical child abuse potential. In contrast, level of parenting stress was not associated with
physical child abuse potential among parents who reported low levels of belief in the value
of corporal punishment. This pattern of results is consistent with theory suggesting that under
conditions of high stress, the underlying belief structure of the parent may significantly
impact parenting behavior.
Thus, high levels of parenting stress may be associated with increased risk of physical
child abuse potential to the extent that the parent’s belief system is tolerant and approving
of use of physical force as a means of intervening with a child. Clearly, parents who
experience high levels of parenting stress whose belief systems are not tolerant of corporal
punishment may still experience risk for problems in parenting. According to the social
information processing and stress and coping models (Hillson & Kuiper, 1994; Milner, 1993,
2000), the nature of the problems in parenting that may occur under stressful conditions will
most likely reflect the idiosyncratic patterns of beliefs and information processing charac-
teristic of the parent.
Several study limitations should be taken into account when interpreting the present
418 J.L. Crouch, L.E. Behl / Child Abuse & Neglect 25 (2001) 413– 419

findings. Clearly, the sample examined was small, and plans are underway for replication of
these findings in a larger sample. Nevertheless, the expected significant interaction was found
despite modest power. A positive feature of the present sample was its inclusion of both
general population and at-risk participants with valid response patterns. Unfortunately the
limited sample size precluded separate analyses within or between general population and
at-risk parents. An additional limitation of the present sample was the fact that most of the
participants were Caucasian and female. Thus, the generalizability of the present findings
across genders and racial/ethnic groups remains to be examined. Further, the present study
did not directly measure parenting behaviors, and research examining the associations
between parental beliefs, reported stress, and use of corporal punishment is needed. Future
research also should examine other factors (e.g., social support), in addition to parental
beliefs regarding corporal punishment, that may moderate the degree of association between
parenting stress and physical child abuse potential.

References

Abidin, R. R. (1995). Parenting Stress Index: manual (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Re-
sources.
Bavolek, S. J. (1984). Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory (AAPI). Eau Clair, WI: Family Development
Resources.
Bavolek, S. J. (1989). Assessing and treating high-risk parenting attitudes. In J. T. Pardeck (Ed.), Child abuse and
neglect: theory, research and practice (pp. 97–110). New York: Gordon & Breach.
Belsky, J. (1993). Etiology of child maltreatment: a developmental-ecological analysis. Psychological Bulletin,
114, 413– 434.
Cicchetti, D., & Rizley, R. (1981). Developmental perspectives on the etiology, intergenerational transmission,
and sequelae of child maltreatment. New Direction for Child Development, 11, 31–55.
Hillson, J. M. C., & Kuiper, N. A. (1994). A stress and coping model of child maltreatment. Clinical Psychology
Review, 14, 261–285.
Milner, J. S. (1986). The Child Abuse Potential Inventory: manual (2nd ed.). Webster, NC: Psytec.
Milner, J. S. (1993). Social information processing and physical child abuse. Clinical Psychology Review, 13,
275–294.
Milner, J. S. (1994). Assessing physical child abuse risk: the Child Abuse Potential Inventory. Clinical
Psychology Review, 14, 547–583.
Milner, J. S. (2000). Social information processing and physical child abuse: theory and research. In D. J. Hansen
(Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation. Motivation and child maltreatment (Vol. 45, pp. 39 – 84). Lincoln,
NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Milner, J. S., & Crouch, J. L. (1997). Impact and detection of response distortions on parenting measures used
to assess risk for physical child abuse. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69, 633– 650.

Résumé

Objectif: Cette étude a mesuré jusqu’à quel point la croyance des parents en la valeur des châtiments
corporels peut modérer l’association entre le niveau de leur stress en tant que parents et leur potentiel
de maltraitance. A partir d’une théorie établie, on s’attendait à ce que les niveaux de stress parental
puissent être associés positivement avec le potentiel maltraitant chez des parents qui avaient fait état
d’un haut niveau de conviction concernant la valeur des châtiments corporels.
 J.L. Crouch, L.E. Behl / Child Abuse & Neglect 25 (2001) 413– 419 419

Méthode: Quarante -et -un parents (25 de la population générale et 16 parents à risque) furent soumis
à une auto-évaluation de leur conviction concernant la valeur des châtiments corporels, du niveau de
leur stress en tant que parents et de leur capacité à être maltraitants. Après avoir retiré les sujets
présentant dans leurs réponses des distorsions ou des éléments manquants, l’échantillon final a
consisté en 31 parents avec des protocoles valides et complets. Selon leurs réponses aux mesures de
l’étude, les personnes interrogées furent rangées dans une catégorie haute ou basse concernant leur
croyance en la valeur des châtiments corporels ou leur stress en tant que parents.
Résultats: Le niveau de stress parental apparut comme positivement associé avec le potentiel de
maltraitance physique. Tel que prévu, l’interaction s’est montrée positive entre le stress parental et la
croyance en la valeur des châtiments corporels. Le niveau de stress parental a été associé positivement
avec le potentiel de maltraitance physique chez les parents ayant fait état de hauts niveaux de croyance
en la valeur des châtiments corporels.
Conclusions: Les résultats présents constituent la révélation d’ une information sociale cohérente sur
le stress et sur les modèles concernant la façon de l’aménager dans l’étiologie de la maltraitance. Ils
sous-évaluent l’importance de considérer à la fois les connaissances des parents et les niveaux de
stress parental dans l’évaluation de leur potentiel pour devenir maltraitants.

Resumen

Objetivo: Esta investigación examinó la medida en la que las creencias parentales acerca del valor del
castigo fı́sico ejercen un efecto moderador en la asociación entre el nivel de estrés asociado a la
paternidad/maternidad y el potencial de maltrato fı́sico infantil. En base a la teorı́a existente, se
esperaba que los niveles de estrés parental estarı́an positivamente asociados con el potencial de
maltrato fı́sico infantil entre los padres/madres que manifestaron altos niveles de creencia en el castigo
fı́sico.
Método: Utilizando medidas de autoinforme, se evaluó la creencia en el valor del castigo fı́sico, el
nivel de estrés asociado a la paternidad/maternidad y el potencial de maltrato fı́sico infantil, en una
muestra de cuarenta y un padres/madres (25 de la población general y 16 alto-riesgo). Una vez
eliminados los autoinformes con altas puntuaciones en los ı́ndices de distorsión de respuesta o datos
perdidos, la muestra final quedó formada por 31 padres/madres con protocolos completos y válidos.
En base a sus respuestas en las medidas de este estudio, los padres/madres se clasificaron como alto
o bajo en las variables creencia en el castigo corporal y estrés parental.
Resultados: Se observó una asociación positiva entre el nivel de estrés asociado a la paternidad/
maternidad y el potencial de maltrato fı́sico infantil. Tal como se esperaba, se observó una interacción
significativa entre el estrés parental y la creencia en el valor del castigo fı́sico. El nivel de estrés
parental estaba asociado positivamente con el potencial de maltrato fı́sico infantil entre los padres/
madres que manifestaron altos niveles de creencia en el castigo fı́sico.
Conclusiones: Estos resultados son consistentes con el modelo del procesamiento de la información
social y con el modelo de estrés y “coping” de la etiologı́a del maltrato fı́sico infantil, y subrayan la
importancia de tener en cuenta tanto las cogniciones parentales como los niveles de estrés parentales
en la evaluación del potencial de maltrato fı́sico infantil.