Caretakers were asked a series of yes-no questions about child care practices at the end of treatment and in the last three months at follow-up (both positive and negative). The results from these questions are shown in Table 8-8 and 8-9. In addition, three scales were formed using these items: positive child care practices (5 items), negative child care practices (10 items), and punishment (5 items, all of which are also included in the negative child care practices scale). Results from the scales are shown in Tables 8-3, 8-4 and 8-5.
|Lost temper when child got on nerves||145||43||147||46||132||63||209||59||37||27||77||35|
|Found that hitting child was good||143||6||147||7||131||12||208||8||37||19||76||8||0.09|
|Hitting child harder that meant to||143||8||147||6||131||10||208||5||37||5||75||8|
|Out of control when punishing child||144||24||146||24||131||40||209||30||0.05||36||11||76||12|
|Have you praised your children||144||94||146||92||132||92||209||92||37||92||76||91|
|Listened to music together w/child||144||86||146||86||132||86||209||82||37||92||77||90|
|Tied child with cord- string-belt||142||0||146||0||132||1||209||0||37||0||76||1|
|Gone to amusement park, pool, picnic||143||71||145||65||130||46||208||37||0.08||37||43||76||68||0.01|
|Uncomfortable hugging child||126||5||134||6||95||5||144||6||33||9||72||4|
|Encouraged child to read book||137||92||140||90||126||82||202||91||0.02||34||94||72||96|
|Have children handled household chores||127||79||125||80||126||75||200||83||0.09||34||91||72||93|
|Not let children into the house||138||2||137||2||127||8||202||4||33||3||72||1|
|Punished for not finishing food||139||7||139||1||0.02||126||6||204||5||33||0||71||0|
|Blamed child w/ things not their fault||142||39||142||33||128||28||204||20||0.07||35||31||75||44|
|Let child to play where not allowed||138||2||138||4||123||1||200||4||33||0||71||1|
|Unable to find someone to watch children||144||9||146||12||131||21||206||12||0.04||35||20||73||27|
NOTE: "FE" indicates significance determined by Fisher's exact test
|Lost temper when child got on nerves||113||44||121||41||106||60||167||57||36||22||72||18|
|Found that hitting child was good||113||6||121||4||105||5||167||4||36||8||71||6|
|Hitting child harder that meant to||113||3||121||5||105||6||167||1||.06||36||6||71||3|
|Out of control when punishing child||112||21||121||23||105||32||167||25||36||14||71||7|
|Have you praised your children||113||89||121||91||106||92||167||94||36||97||72||93|
|Listened to music together w/child||113||82||121||84||106||81||167||86||36||94||69||93|
|Tied child with cord- string-belt||113||0||121||2||106||1||167||1||36||0||70||0|
|Gone to amusement park, pool, picnic||113||74||121||70||106||48||167||44||35||94||70||90|
|Uncomfortable hugging child||102||4||110||5||74||5||116||6||35||6||66||3|
|Encouraged child to read book||107||83||115||81||103||87||160||89||34||100||67||96|
|Have children handled household chores||101||75||104||75||103||70||160||83||.02||34||94||63||89|
|Not let children into the house||106||0||115||0||103||3||162||3||33||3||64||3|
|Punished for not finishing food||109||3||116||2||103||2||162||2||33||3||65||3|
|Blamed child w/ things not their fault||109||34||116||42||103||21||162||23||33||15||66||14|
|Let child to play where not allowed||109||1||114||0||101||2||160||1||33||0||65||3|
|Unable to find someone to watch children||111||3||122||0||103||17||165||18||33||21||67||19|
Kentucky. In the post-treatment interview, "punishment for not finishing food" was the only item for which there were significant differences between the experimental and control groups, with a greater proportion of the control group responding affirmatively. There were no items on which there were significant differences at follow-up.
There were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups with regard to the positive and negative child care practice scales at the time of the second or third interviews. Both groups responded affirmatively to over 80 percent of the positive items and less than 15 percent of the negative items at both points in time. There were also no significant differences in change over time, in both groups there was a decline in the number of negative child care practices over time. With regard to the 5 items that pertain to punishment, caretakers in the experimental group responded affirmatively to a greater average proportion of punishment items than did the caretakers from the control group (.25 vs .20, p = .067) at the initial interview. At post-treatment, the average proportion of punishment items answered affirmatively were nearly the same (.17 for experimental group vs. .16 for the control group). Thus, from the first interview to the second, the reduction in the average proportion of punishment items endorsed was greater for the experimental group than for the control group (.09 fewer vs. .04 fewer, p= .054).18 However, across the three points in time, there were no significant differences in change.
New Jersey. On two of the items there were significant differences between the experimental and control groups at post-treatment: "have things sometimes gotten out of control when you punished your children?" happened more often in the control group and "have you encouraged your child to read a book?" which was done more often by experimental group respondents. At follow-up, there were two other items with differences: more control group respondents said they hit their child harder than they meant to (6% vs. 1%, p = .06) while more experimental group respondents said they had the children handle household chores (83% vs. 70%, p = .02).
On the scales, there were no significant differences between the experimental and control groups with respect to the positive child care practice items at either post-treatment or follow-up. At both points in time, both groups responded affirmatively to over 75 percent of the items. There were significant differences between the experimental and control groups with respect to the negative child care practice items at post-treatment. Caretakers in the experimental group responded affirmatively to 14 percent of the items whereas caretakers in the control group responded affirmatively to 18 percent of the items (p = .02). The difference disappeared at follow-up. At post-treatment, the experimental group significantly less often used punishment (.20 vs. .25, p = .04), but the difference was not statistically significant in the secondary analysis (p = .08) or in the primary analysis at follow-up (p = .15). There were no significant differences between groups in the change in changes over time in proportion of negative child care practice or punishment items.
Tennessee. At post-treatment, on one item there was a significant difference between experimental and control groups; more experimental group respondents indicated they had gone to an amusement park, pool, or picnic (68% vs. 43%, p = .01). There were no items with significant differences at follow-up. There were no significant differences in any of the three scales at either post-treatment or follow-up, nor in changes over time. The experimental group had a higher negative child care practices score at the first interview, and declined more than the control group, resulting in a nearly significant multivariate time-group interaction (p = .09) and a significant univariate comparison of the first interview score with the average of the scores from the later two interviews (p = .03).
(18) In the secondary analysis, there was again a .09 reduction in the average proportion of punishment items endorsed by the experimental group and a .04 reduction for the control group (p = .03).