In the journal-to-journalism cycle, the details of a study can get distorted on their way to the web. Here are three different takes on a recent article published by Canadian researchers. The study had apparently investigated links between spanking and child outcomes.

Notice that the headlines in each study make different claims and focus on different variables.

Spanking kids can cause long-term harm: Canada study

Children Who Get Physical Punishment Tend Toward Aggression: Survey

Spanking makes kids more aggressive, should be illegal: Report

b) Identify the variables in each headline. Why do you think the different sources emphasized different variables?

c) Do you think the Canadian study at the source of these headlines was able to support a causal claim? Why or why not?

d) Is it possible to conduct an experimental study on spanking ? Why or why not ?

e) You might notice that the first headline describes the project as a "Study." The second headline describes the project as a "survey". The third headline describes the project as a "report."

Use your psycINFO skills to find the original publication and identify it as an empirical journal article or a review journal article.

Thanks to Dr. Carrie Smith of the University of Mississippi for sending these headlines!