Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

A Qualitative Analysis of Stay-At-Home Parents’ Spanking Tweets

Abstract

Objective

This qualitative study used Twitter to examine stay-at-home parents’ publicly available postings to Twitter about discipline and spanking. Many adults still support the use of spanking despite a substantial body of evidence demonstrating that spanking is linked to a range of negative child outcomes. Little is currently known about how parents think about spanking as a disciplinary practice and how parents express these beliefs online.

Method

Five million publicly available tweets were collected from self-identified stay-at-home parents. Tweets were screened for discipline and spanking content. A qualitative analysis was conducted on the final set of tweets (N= 648).

Results

Stay-at-home parents were most likely to tweet about information related to discipline and spanking compared to tweets that made up other global themes (e.g., discipline tips). Parents most commonly posted tweets that reflected their anti-spanking beliefs compared to tweets that made up other subthemes (e.g., pro-spanking). Tweets in support of spanking emerged as well, with fathers being more likely than mothers to tweet about pro-spanking beliefs and desires. However, mothers were more likely than fathers to tweet about pro-spanking behaviors.

Conclusion

Our results provide evidence that stay-at-home parents turn to Twitter to obtain disciplinary information and disclose their anti-spanking and pro-spanking beliefs. Anti-spanking tweets potentially reflect changing social norms and suggest that some stay-at-home parents on Twitter may be engaging in selective self-presentation. Thus, Twitter may be one avenue to use for interventions to set social norms that aim to reduce parental corporal punishment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Data Availability

The qualitative codebook used for the current study is available at Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/8y2mf). Data could not be made available due to ethical constraints concerning identifiable information, including Twitter handles.

References

  1. Ammari, T., & Schoenebeck, S. (2015). Understanding and supporting fathers and fatherhood on social media sites. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1905–1914. Seoul, Republic of Korea. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702205.

  2. Ammari, T., Schoenebeck, S. Y., & Romero, D. (2018). Pseudonymous parents: comparing parenting roles and identities on the mommit and daddit subreddits. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Montreal QC, Canada. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174063.

  3. Bartholomew, M. K., Schoppe‐Sullivan, S. J., Glassman, M., Kamp Dush, C. M., & Sullivan, J. M. (2012). New parents’ Facebook use at the transition to parenthood. Family Relations, 61(3), 455–469.

  4. Bazarova, N. N., & Choi, Y. H. (2014). Self-disclosure in social media: extending the functional approach to disclosure motivations and characteristics on social network sites. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 635–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12106.

  5. Brems, C., Temmerman, M., Graham, T., & Broersma, M. (2017). Personal branding on Twitter. How employed and freelance journalists stage themselves on social media. Digital Journalism, 5(4), 443–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1176534.

  6. Brown, A. S., Holden, G. W., & Ashraf, R. (2016). Spank, slap, or hit? How labels alter perceptions of child discipline. Psychology of Violence, 8(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000080.

  7. Cabrera, N. J., Volling, B. L., & Barr, R. (2018). Fathers are parents, too! Widening the lens on parenting for children’s development. Child Development Perspectives, 12(3), 152–157. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12275.

  8. Cha, M., Hamed, H., Fabricio, B., & Krishna, P. G. (2010). Measuring user influence in Twitter: the million follower fallacy. In Proceedings of the Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM 2010). Washington, DC: AAAI Press.

  9. Child Trends. (2015). Attitudes toward spanking: indicators of child and youth well-being. https://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/51_Attitudes _Toward_Spanking.pdf.

  10. Day, R. D., & Lamb, M. E. (2004). Conceptualizing and measuring father involvement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  11. Dayton, C. J., Buczkowski, R., Muzik, M., Goletz, J., Hicks, L., Walsh, T. B., & Bocknek, E. L. (2016). Expectant fathers’ beliefs and expectations about fathering as they prepare to parent a new infant. Social Work Research, 40(4), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svw017.

  12. Donnelly, M., & Straus, M. (2005). Corporal punishment of children in theoretical perspective. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.

  13. Duggan, M., Lenhart, A., Lampe, C., & Ellison, N. B. (2015). Parents and social media. Pew Research Center, Internet & Technology. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/07/16/parents-and-social-media/.

  14. Fraga, J. (2017). As they dig deeper into parenting, fathers seek community, support. NPR. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/02/21/515414558/as-they-dig-deeper-into-parenting-fathers-seek-community-support.

  15. Fréchette, S., & Romano, E. (2015). Change in corporal punishment over time in a representative sample of Canadian parents. Journal of Family Psychology, 29(4), 507–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000104.

  16. Fréchette, S., & Romano, E. (2017). How do parents label their physical disciplinary practices? A focus on the definition of corporal punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 71, 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.02.003.

  17. Fischer, J., & Anderson, V. N. (2012). Gender role attitudes and characteristics of stay-at-home and employed fathers. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 13(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024359.

  18. Frazier, E. R., Liu, G. C., & Dauk, K. L. (2014). Creating a safe place for pediatric care: a no hit zone. Hospital Pediatrics, 4(4), 247–250. https://doi.org/10.1542/hpeds.2013-0106.

  19. Friedman, M. (2016). Daddyblogs know best: histories of fatherhood in the cyber age. In E. Podnieks (Ed.), Pops in pop culture: fatherhood, masculinity, and the new man (pp. 87–103). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

  20. Gershoff, E. T., & Grogan-Kaylor, A. (2016). Spanking and child outcomes: old controversies and new meta-analyses. Journal of Family Psychology, 30(4), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000191.

  21. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Doubleday.

  22. Greenwood, S., Perrin, A., & Duggan, M. (2016). Social media update 2016. Pew Research Center, Internet & Technology. http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/11/social-media-update-2016/.

  23. Holden, G. W., Brown, A. S., Baldwin, A. S., & Caderao, K. C. (2014). Research findings can change attitudes about corporal punishment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38(5), 902–908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.013.

  24. Holden, G. W., Miller, P. C., & Harris, S. D. (1999). The instrumental side of corporal punishment: parents’ reported practices and outcome expectancies. Journal of Marriage and Family, 61(4), 908–919.

  25. Holden, G. W., Williamson, P. A., & Holland, G. W. O. (2014). Eavesdropping on the family: a pilot investigation of corporal punishment in the home. Journal of Family Psychology, 28(3), 401–406. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036370.

  26. Hudson, D. B., Elek, S. M., & Fleck, C. M. (2001). First-time mothers’ and fathers’ transition to parenthood: infant care self-efficacy, parenting, and infant sex. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 24(1), 31–43.

  27. Hurley, K. (2016). Many still spank their kids in the heat of the moment: Here's how to parent more effectively. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/parenting/wp/2016/10/12/remaining-calm-when-dealing-with-tantrums-is-a-skill-heres-how-to-get-it/?utm_term=.5af81f0a4fbd.

  28. Jeynes, W. H. (2016). Meta-analysis on the roles of fathers in parenting: are they unique? Marriage & Family Review, 52(7), 665–688. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2016.1157121.

  29. Kim, J., Lee, S. J., Taylor, C. A., & Guterman, N. B. (2014). Dyadic profiles of parental disciplinary behavior and links with parenting context. Child Maltreatment, 19(2), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559514532009.

  30. Lansford, J. E., Alampay, L. P., Al-Hassan, S., Bacchini, D., Bombi, A. S., Bornstein, M. C., & Zelli, A. (2010). Corporal punishment of children in nine countries as a function of child gender and parent gender. International Journal of Pediatrics, 2010, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/672780.

  31. Lee, J. Y., & Lee, S. J. (2018). Caring is masculine: stay-at-home fathers and masculine identity. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 19(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000079.

  32. Lee, S. J., Lansford, J. E., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2012). Parental agreement of reporting parent to child aggression using the conflict tactics scales. Child Abuse & Neglect, 36(6), 510–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2012.04.005.

  33. Lyles, C. R., López, A., Pasick, R., & Sarkar, U. (2013). “5 min of uncomfyness is better than dealing with cancer 4 a lifetime”: an exploratory qualitative analysis of cervical and breast cancer screening dialogue on Twitter. Journal of Cancer Education, 28(1), 127–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-012-0432-2.

  34. Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313.

  35. McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282.

  36. Metaxas, P. T., & TwitterTrails Research Team. (2017). Retweets indicate agreement, endorsement, trust: a meta-analysis of published Twitter research. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.3555.pdf.

  37. Milford, C., Kriel, Y., Njau, I., Nkole, T., Gichangi, P., & Cordero, J. P., the UPTAKE Project Team. (2017). Teamwork in qualitative research: descriptions of a multicountry team approach. InternationalJournal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917727189.

  38. Munger, K. (2016). Tweetment effects on the tweeted: experimentally reducing racist harassment. Political Behavior, 39(3), 629–649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-016-9373-5.

  39. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Parenting knowle dge, attitudes, and practices. In H. Breiner, M. Ford, & V. L. Gadsden (Eds) Parenting matters: supporting parents of children ages 0–8(vol. 2). Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK402020/.

  40. Pace, G. T., Lee, S. J., & Grogan-Kaylor, A. (2019). Spanking and young children’s socioemotional development in low- and middle-income countries. Child Abuse & Neglect, 88, 84–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.11.003.

  41. Pelchant, D., Lefebvre, H., & Perreault, M. (2003). Differences and similarities between mothers' and fathers’ experiences of parenting a child with a disability. Journal of Child Health Care, 7(4), 231–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/13674935030074001.

  42. Pew Research Center. (2015). Parenting in America: Outlook, worries, aspirations are strongly linked to financial situation. https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/12/2015-12-17_parenting-in-america_FINAL.pdf.

  43. Pretorius, K., Johnson, K. E., & Rew, L. (2019). An integrative review: understanding parental use of social media to influence infant and child health. Maternal Child Health Journal, 23(10), 1360–1370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-019-02781-w.

  44. Ryan, R., Kalil, A., Ziol-Guest, K. M., & Padilla, C. (2016). Socioeconomic gaps in parents’ discipline strategies from 1988 to 2011. Pediatrics, 138(6), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-0720.

  45. Schoenebeck, S. Y. (2013). The secret life of online moms: anonymity and disinhibition on YouBeMom.com. In Proceedings of the Seventh International AAAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 555–562.

  46. Solomon, C. R. (2014). “I feel like a rock star:” fatherhood for stay-at-home fathers. Fathering, 12(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.3149/fth.1201.52.

  47. Stahlschmidt, M. J., Threlfall, J., Seay, K. D., Lewis, E. M., & Kohl, P. L. (2013). Recruiting fathers to parenting programs: advice from dads and fatherhood program providers. Children and Youth Services Review, 35(10), 1734–1741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.07.004.

  48. Taylor, C. A., Al-Hiyari, R., Lee, S. J., Priebe, A., Guerrero, L. W., & Bales, A. (2016). Beliefs and ideologies linked with approval of corporal punishment: a content analysis of online comments. Health Education Research, 31(4), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyw029.

  49. Taylor, C. A., Moeller, W., Hamvas, L., & Rice, J. C. (2013). Parents’ professional sources of advice regarding child discipline and their use of corporal punishment. Clinical Pediatrics, 52(2), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/0009922812465944.

  50. Tsukayama, H. (2017). Twitter is officially doubling the character limit to 280. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/11/07/twitter-is-officially-doubling-the-character-limit-to-280/?utm_term=.64115bf32748.

  51. Twitter, Inc. (n.d.a). Follow, search, and get users. https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/accounts-and-users/follow-search-get-users/api-reference/get-followers-list.

  52. Twitter, Inc. (n.d.b). Get tweet timelines. https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/tweets/timelines/api-reference/get-statuses-user_timeline.html.

  53. United Nations Children’s Fund. (2014). Hidden in plain sight: A statistical analysis of violence against children. https://files.unicef.org/publications/files/Hidden_in_plain_sight_statistical_analysis_EN_3_Sept_2014.pdf.

  54. Uski, S., & Lampinen, A. (2016). Social norms and self-presentation on social network sites: profile work in action. New Media & Society, 18(3), 447–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814543164.

  55. van der Nagel, E. (2018). Alts and automediality: compartmentalising the self through multiple social media profiles. M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture, 21(2), 1–4.

  56. Vitak, J. (2012). The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56(4), 451–470.

  57. Vraga, E. K., & Bode, L. (2017a). I do not believe you: how providing a source corrects health misperceptions across social media platforms. Information, Communication & Society, 21(10), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1313883.

  58. Vraga, E. K., & Bode, L. (2017b). Using expert sources to correct health misinformation in social media. Science Communication, 39(5), 621–645. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017731776.

  59. Wissow, L. S. (2001). Ethnicity, income, and parenting contexts of physical punishment in a national sample of families with young children. Child Maltreatment, 6(2), 118–129.

  60. Zero to Three. (2016). National parent survey overview and key insights. https://www.zerotothree.org/resources/1424-national-parent-survey-overview-and-key-insights#downloads.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This manuscript is based upon work supported by the University of Michigan, Rackham Graduate School [Application #185, 2017]. The sponsor was not directly involved in any aspect of the research.

Funding

J.Y.L. and T.A. received funding from the University of Michigan Rackham Graduate School as part of the Rackham Interdisciplinary Workshop that supported this research.

Author Contributions

J.Y.L. designed the study, collected data, cleaned the data, conducted the main analyses, and wrote the manuscript. A.C.G.K. provided supervision of the main analyses, wrote the manuscript, and edited the manuscript. S.J.L. provided guidance with framing the study using theory, wrote parts of the manuscript, and edited the manuscript. T.A. assisted with cleaning the data. A.L. also assisted with cleaning the data, as well as coding and analyzing the data. P.D.K. provided supervision of the main analyses and edited and reviewed the manuscript.

Author information

Correspondence to Joyce Y. Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

The current study was reviewed by the University of Michigan Health Sciences and Behavioral Sciences Institutional Review Board (IRB) and was considered secondary data analysis (HUM00143436), given the use of publicly available data. As such, the study was considered to be exempt from IRB oversight.

Informed Consent

Given that data were publicly available, informed consent was not directly obtained from participants included in this study. However, consent to collection and use of data was obtained from all individual participants by Twitter per their privacy policy (https://twitter.com/en/privacy).

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, J.Y., Grogan-Kaylor, A.C., Lee, S.J. et al. A Qualitative Analysis of Stay-At-Home Parents’ Spanking Tweets. J Child Fam Stud 29, 817–830 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01691-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Discipline
  • Corporal punishment
  • Spanking
  • Twitter
  • Stay-at-home parents
  • Social media