Where is the line between firm discipline and child abuse? For millions of families in the United States, the answer depends on where they grew up, what their parents did, and how their culture defines good parenting. A new study published in the Journal of Child and Family Studies tackles this thorny question with an ambitious goal: building a scientific instrument that can measure how people from different backgrounds judge parenting practices that are accepted in some communities but condemned in others. The Parenting Practices and Discipline Scale, or PPDS, developed by Kevin Ortiz Diaz, Maureen C. Kenny, and Helia Baez at Florida International University, is one of the first tools designed specifically to capture culturally situated discipline practices that existing measures simply ignore.
The stakes are enormous. Child abuse is recognized as a global health issue, and in the United States it occurs at what researchers describe as epidemic proportions. Federal data show 546,159 victims of child abuse and neglect in 2023 alone, and the vast majority of these cases, roughly 89 percent, are committed by one or both parents. Children from minority groups are often the most affected, with Black or African American children among the most likely to experience abuse, second only to American Indian or Alaska Native children. Yet the definitions of what constitutes abuse vary dramatically across countries and cultures, creating a legal and ethical minefield for immigrant families who may not realize that practices considered normal at home are illegal in their new country.
The problem is particularly acute for Hispanic families, who make up 19 percent of the American population and represent the largest share of recent immigrants. Hispanic culture is far from monolithic, encompassing communities from South and Central America and the Caribbean with distinct traditions, but certain common threads run through the research. The concept of familismo, a cultural orientation and sense of obligation to family, has been linked to greater parental warmth in some studies. At the same time, physical violence as a disciplinary method remains common in many Hispanic cultures, and the chances that such behaviors are carried over by families immigrating to the United States are high. The result is a potential collision between generations of cultural practice and a legal system, anchored by the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1974, that defines abuse in terms of serious physical or emotional harm.
What makes the new study distinctive is its grounding in intersectionality theory, a framework rooted in feminist scholarship that examines how multiple categories of identity, such as race, ethnicity, gender, and nativity, interact to shape experience. Rather than treating demographic characteristics as independent variables, the researchers designed their analyses to test whether these dimensions jointly predict how individuals classify discipline practices as culturally acceptable or abusive. The framework has practical urgency: racial and ethnic disparities exist in both the reporting and substantiation of child maltreatment, and current child protection policies can disproportionately affect women of color who use social services and face heightened surveillance and risk of reports to child protective services.
The scale itself emerged from a careful two-stage piloting process. First, four experienced mental health clinicians specializing in child abuse, with 10 to 20 years of experience each, reviewed a draft pool of 54 items describing parenting behaviors and case vignettes. Then ten first-generation Hispanic immigrants from a range of nationalities, including Puerto Rican, Cuban, Colombian, Mexican, Dominican, and Nicaraguan participants, examined the refined items and identified which behaviors they would associate with parents in their own cultures and whether they would label those behaviors abusive or acceptable. Consensus required agreement from at least 70 percent of the pilot group. Eighteen items survived, ten identified as culturally acceptable behaviors such as yelling, using the chancla, the slipper famously wielded in many Latino households, or letting a child sleep with parents, and eight identified as abusive behaviors such as spanking, leaving a child alone in a car, or forcing a child to bathe with an adult.
The main study recruited 1,477 undergraduates at a large Hispanic-Serving Institution in Miami, ultimately yielding an analytic sample of 1,089 participants after exclusions for failed attention checks, missing data, and groups too small for meaningful analysis. The final sample was 72.2 percent Hispanic, 16.3 percent non-Hispanic Black, and 11.6 percent non-Hispanic White, nearly 70 percent U.S.-born, and predominantly female at 88.8 percent. Participants rated each of the 18 behaviors on a three-point scale: not abusive, inappropriate but not abusive, or abusive. The choice of a college population was deliberate, since emerging adults are on the cusp of parenthood, attitudes at this life stage predict later parenting intentions, and parenting practices tend to be transmitted intergenerationally.
Psychometrically, the study unfolded in two parts. Study 1 established the scale’s initial properties using exploratory factor analysis with principal axis factoring and oblique rotation on a polychoric correlation matrix, an approach suited to the ordinal, non-normally distributed responses. The analysis supported a two-factor structure: Factor 1 captured discipline and psychological aggression, including spanking, yelling, the chancla, cursing, ignoring, comparing, fighting, and religion, while Factor 2 reflected neglect and physical endangerment, such as using drugs in front of a child, refusing treatment for illness, and allowing smoking. The two factors accounted for 29.5 percent of the variance and were moderately correlated. Internal consistency for the full 18-item measure was acceptable at a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.71, though the abusive subscale showed weaker reliability, a limitation the authors acknowledge candidly.
Study 2 then deployed regression models to test how demographic identities shaped perceptions, and the results were revealing. Gender and parental status emerged as the strongest and most consistent predictors: women and parents were significantly more likely to classify culturally acceptable practices as abusive. Among Hispanic participants, those not born in the United States were more likely than U.S.-born Hispanics to view behaviors like spanking as abusive, a finding that ran counter to the researchers’ hypothesis and suggests that acculturation may shift parenting beliefs toward American child protection norms. Across racial and ethnic groups, Hispanic participants were more likely than Black participants to classify culturally acceptable practices as abusive. Notably, for the more overtly harmful behaviors in Factor 2, parental status was the only significant predictor, suggesting broad agreement that neglecting a sick child or encouraging substance use transcends cultural and gendered expectations.
The effect sizes were small, with the models explaining roughly 1 to 6 percent of the variance, a reminder that unmeasured cultural and contextual factors account for most of the variation in how people judge discipline. Still, the patterns carry real implications for prevention. The authors suggest that father-focused education programs may be valuable, since men were less likely to identify physical discipline as harmful and may therefore be at greater risk of normalizing such practices. Culturally adapted interventions have already shown promise, from brief summer parent training programs benefiting Hispanic children to the multinational Triple P Positive Parenting Program, and the PPDS could help practitioners identify which disciplinary practices are perceived as acceptable within specific communities, allowing messaging to be tailored rather than uniform.
The researchers are careful to frame their findings as preliminary. The sample was heavily female and drawn from a single Miami institution in a minority-majority city, socioeconomic status was not assessed, and social desirability bias may have influenced responses to questions about parenting. The abusive subscale needs refinement, and future work should apply confirmatory factor analysis and measurement invariance testing across cultural groups. Yet the core contribution stands: a novel measure that captures culturally situated discipline practices invisible to existing tools like the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire or the Child Abuse Potential Inventory. As parenting practices pass from generation to generation and families cross borders into legal systems with different rules, understanding exactly how culture shapes perceptions of abuse may be the first step toward protecting children without criminalizing the traditions their parents brought with them.
Subject of Research: Development and validation of a scale measuring cultural perceptions of parenting and discipline practices
Article Title: Development and Validation of the Parenting Practices and Discipline Scale in an Ethnically Diverse Sample
Article References: Ortiz Diaz, K., Kenny, M. C., & Baez, H. (2026). Development and Validation of the Parenting Practices and Discipline Scale in an Ethnically Diverse Sample. Journal of Child and Family Studies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-026-03370-6
Image Credits: AI Generated
DOI: 10.1007/s10826-026-03370-6
Keywords: child abuse, parenting practices, discipline, Hispanic families, intersectionality, psychometrics, scale development, cultural perceptions, child welfare, corporal punishment, acculturation, exploratory factor analysis
Login
.jpg#/media/File:Vampire_finch_(4229090408).jpg){kind=link}