Your six-year-old has a meltdown in the grocery store, screaming and throwing items from the cart. Mortified by the stares from other shoppers, you react with what feels like the only option available—you yell, threaten consequences, maybe even spank. In the moment, it works. The screaming stops. But three weeks later, you’re back in the same store facing an even bigger tantrum. What happened?
Or this: Your teenager breaks curfew for the third time. Furious and scared, you ground them for a month. They become sullen and withdrawn, sneaking out more often than before. The defiance you were trying to correct has intensified. Where did you go wrong?
Here’s the uncomfortable truth that decades of research have revealed: Many of the discipline strategies parents use instinctively—the ones that feel right in heated moments, the ones maybe used on us as children—don’t actually improve behavior over time. In fact, they often make things progressively worse.
The Science of What Actually Works
Before exploring what doesn’t work, we need to understand what effective discipline actually looks like. In the late 1960s, developmental psychologist Diana Baumrind began groundbreaking research at the University of California, Berkeley, studying how different parenting styles affected children’s development.
In her landmark 1966 study published in Child Development, Baumrind identified three distinct parenting styles: authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive. Her research, expanded by Maccoby and Martin in 1983, revealed that these styles fall along two crucial dimensions: responsiveness (warmth, support, and emotional attunement) and demandingness (expectations, rules, and behavioral control).
The authoritative style—high in both responsiveness and demandingness—consistently produced the best outcomes. Children raised with authoritative parenting showed higher self-esteem, better emotional regulation, superior social skills, and fewer behavioral problems. Baumrind’s 1971 monograph “Current Patterns of Parental Authority” provided compelling evidence that children of authoritative parents were more socially competent and had fewer behavioral problems than children raised with other approaches.
Research spanning five decades, from Baumrind’s 1967 and 1971 studies through work by researchers like Lamborn in 1991 and Steinberg in 1992 and 1994, has consistently confirmed this pattern. Authoritative parenting—combining warmth with firm expectations, using reasoning rather than coercion, and viewing discipline as teaching rather than punishment—leads to optimal child development across cultures and contexts.
The word “discipline” itself reveals what works. It comes from the Latin disciplina, meaning “instruction, training, or knowledge.” Effective discipline teaches desirable behavior. It doesn’t simply punish undesirable behavior. This distinction—between teaching and punishing—is where many parents go wrong.
The 5 Discipline Mistakes That Backfire
1. Using Physical Punishment (Spanking, Hitting, or Other Physical Discipline)
This is perhaps the most researched and most controversial discipline topic. Many parents were spanked as children and feel they “turned out fine.” The cultural debate is loud. But the research evidence, accumulated over decades across hundreds of studies, tells a consistent story that’s hard to ignore.
In 2002, psychologist Elizabeth Gershoff published a comprehensive meta-analysis in Psychological Bulletin examining 88 studies spanning 62 years of research on physical punishment. Her findings were sobering: corporal punishment was associated with 11 different negative outcomes for children, including increased aggression, decreased mental health, impaired parent-child relationships, and increased risk of becoming a victim of physical abuse.
A 2013 meta-analysis by Christopher Ferguson examining only longitudinal studies—research that followed children over time—found that even when controlling for children’s initial behavior levels, both spanking and broader corporal punishment predicted worse outcomes. Children who were spanked showed increased externalizing problems, internalizing problems, and lower cognitive performance over time.
The most recent comprehensive review, published in 2021 in The Lancet, examined 69 prospective longitudinal studies. The conclusions were unambiguous: Physical punishment consistently predicts increases in child behavior problems over time. It is not associated with any positive outcomes. It increases the risk of involvement with child protective services. In quasi-experimental studies, physical punishment predicts worsening behavior over time.
The mechanism: Why does physical punishment backfire? Research reveals several pathways. Studies from as early as the 1960s showed that pain elicits reflexive aggression. When you hit a child to teach them not to hit, you’re modeling the exact behavior you’re trying to eliminate. Children learn that when you’re angry or someone isn’t doing what you want, physical aggression is an acceptable response.
Additionally, research published in 2012 examining over 11,000 children from White, Black, Hispanic, and Asian American families found longitudinal links between spanking and increased externalizing behaviors across all racial and ethnic groups. Another study found that children who were spanked were seven times more likely to be severely assaulted by their parents than children who weren’t spanked—75% of substantiated physical abuse cases occurred during episodes of physical punishment that escalated.
A 2025 meta-analysis published in Frontiers in Psychology examining corporal punishment and violent behavior found that more frequent corporal punishment was linked to greater aggression in a dose-response relationship. The evidence is clear: physical punishment doesn’t improve behavior; it worsens it over time while teaching children that violence is an acceptable problem-solving tool.
What happens instead: In the short term, physical punishment may stop immediate behavior through fear and pain. But over time, children either become desensitized (requiring escalating force to achieve compliance) or develop anxiety, depression, and increased aggression. The behavior you’re trying to eliminate intensifies, and the relationship that makes all discipline effective—the parent-child bond—erodes.
2. Harsh Verbal Punishment and Psychological Control
Many parents who would never spank their children don’t realize that harsh verbal discipline—yelling, name-calling, threats, shame-based criticism, or psychological control—can be equally damaging, if not more so.
Research examining Diana Baumrind’s parenting typology found that variable-centered analyses of authoritarian-distinctive practices identified verbal hostility and psychological control as the most detrimental coercive power-assertive practices. These were more harmful than even severe physical punishment in some measures of child adjustment.
Psychological control includes tactics like:
- Withdrawing love or affection to manipulate behavior
- Inducing guilt (“After everything I do for you…”)
- Conditional regard (“I only love you when you’re good”)
- Shaming or humiliating the child
- Threatening abandonment
- Invalidating the child’s feelings or perceptions
Studies on authoritarian parenting consistently show that children raised with high control and low responsiveness exhibit lower cognitive performance, higher levels of anxiety, poor social skills, more behavioral problems, and lower self-esteem. A 2024 study from China found that children with authoritarian parents are at higher risk of developing mental disorders, including anxiety and depression.
What happens instead: When discipline relies on shame, fear, or conditional love, children don’t internalize healthy behavioral standards—they develop defenses. They might become rigidly compliant on the surface while harboring resentment and rebellion that emerges later. Or they internalize the criticism, developing anxiety, depression, and low self-worth that makes behavioral regulation even harder.
The parent-child relationship becomes characterized by fear rather than trust. And since all effective discipline requires a strong relationship foundation, harsh verbal punishment undermines the very mechanism through which discipline works.
3. Inconsistent or Arbitrary Discipline
You let something slide today because you’re tired, but tomorrow you come down hard on the same behavior. One parent says yes while the other says no. Rules exist but aren’t enforced, or they’re enforced unpredictably. Consequences have no clear connection to the misbehavior.
Baumrind’s research on parental authority patterns identified arbitrary discipline as one of the authoritarian-distinctive practices that predicted poor child outcomes. Children need consistency and predictability to develop healthy self-regulation.
What this looks like:
- Consequences that depend entirely on the parent’s mood rather than the child’s behavior
- Rules that are enforced sometimes but not others
- Different standards applied to different children in the same family
- Punishments that have no logical connection to the misbehavior
- Constantly changing expectations without explanation
The developmental impact: Children learn best through consistent patterns. When discipline is arbitrary or inconsistent, they can’t identify what behaviors are actually problematic or what the actual standards are. This creates anxiety (because they can’t predict what will upset their parents) and impairs the development of internal behavioral control.
Research on authoritative versus authoritarian parenting shows that authoritative parents maintain consistent, predictable standards. They enforce rules reliably, and when exceptions are made, they explain why. This consistency allows children to internalize behavioral expectations and develop self-discipline.
When discipline is inconsistent, children often test boundaries constantly—not to be defiant, but to try to identify where the actual boundaries are. The behavior problems intensify as children struggle to make sense of unpredictable responses.
4. Punishing the Behavior Without Teaching the Alternative
A child hits their sibling, so you punish them. But you never teach them what to do instead when they’re angry or frustrated. A teenager lies about where they’re going, so you ground them. But you never address why they felt lying was necessary or help them develop communication skills for negotiating freedoms.
This is punishment without instruction—the opposite of what “discipline” etymologically means. The American Academy of Pediatrics identifies three components of effective discipline: a loving parent-child relationship, positive reinforcement to increase good behavior, and strategies for eliminating undesired behavior. Notice that two of these three components are about building positive behavior, not just suppressing negative behavior.
What this looks like:
- Responding to every misbehavior with consequences but never teaching replacement behaviors
- Focusing exclusively on what children shouldn’t do without guiding them toward what they should do
- Assuming that punishment alone will motivate children to figure out appropriate behavior on their own
- Missing opportunities to teach emotional regulation, problem-solving, or social skills
The research evidence: Studies examining authoritative parenting show that effective parents guide behavior by reasoning with their children. They use discipline moments as opportunities for teaching. When a child misbehaves, authoritative parents might impose a consequence, but they also explain why the behavior was problematic, help the child understand the impact on others, and guide them toward better choices.
Baumrind’s 1991 research emphasized that authoritative parenting is characterized by responsiveness with the goal of promoting self-regulation and encouraging self-assertion. The discipline is firmly enforcing rules of socialization and behavioral standards, but crucially, parents engage in open, two-way communication about those standards.
What happens instead: When you only punish without teaching, children may suppress the behavior to avoid consequences, but they don’t develop the skills needed for genuine self-regulation. As they get older and the threat of parental punishment decreases, the problematic behaviors often resurface—sometimes more intensely—because the underlying skills were never developed.
5. Over-Controlling and Not Allowing Natural Consequences
Some parents try to prevent every mistake, swooping in to rescue children from the natural consequences of their choices. Or they impose such rigid control that children never develop autonomy or learn to make decisions.
This manifests as:
- Doing children’s homework to prevent the “failure” of a bad grade
- Constantly reminding, nagging, and managing every aspect of a child’s life so they never have to self-manage
- Not allowing children age-appropriate decision-making opportunities
- Preventing any discomfort or disappointment
- Setting such rigid rules that there’s no room for children to develop judgment
Research on parenting styles distinguishes between effective behavioral control and negatively controlling efforts. Positive authoritative parenting involves high support and high rule-setting combined with autonomy-stimulating behavior. The negative dimension—which includes excessive control that undermines autonomy—is associated with worse outcomes.
Why this backfires: Children need opportunities to experience natural consequences in order to develop internal motivation and self-regulation. When parents control everything, children don’t develop the executive function skills needed to regulate their own behavior. They become dependent on external management rather than internal guidance.
Studies on motivation and parenting show that authoritarian parenting’s high demands and low responsiveness are associated with lower intrinsic motivation and higher extrinsic motivation. Children comply with rules out of fear of punishment rather than internalized understanding of why the rules matter. In the absence of external control—when they leave for college, for example—these children often struggle because they never developed internal behavioral regulation.
Additionally, over-controlled children often either become passive and dependent, waiting for adults to tell them what to do, or they rebel explosively, seeking any opportunity to assert the autonomy they’ve been denied.
The Pattern Behind the Mistakes
Look at all five of these discipline mistakes and you’ll notice they share fundamental problems:
They rely on fear, pain, or control rather than connection: Effective discipline, research shows, works through the parent-child relationship. When you damage that relationship through harsh punishment, unpredictability, or excessive control, you undermine the foundation that makes all discipline effective.
They focus on suppressing behavior rather than teaching skills: Children don’t just need to know what not to do—they need to learn what to do instead, and why.
They’re about the parent’s immediate relief rather than the child’s long-term development: Many of these strategies “work” in the moment to stop behavior, which is why parents keep using them. But they fail—or backfire—over time.
They underestimate children’s need for both structure and autonomy: Baumrind’s research showed that children need the balance of authoritative parenting: firm standards with emotional warmth, clear expectations with room for growing autonomy, consequences with teaching.
What Actually Works: The Authoritative Alternative
If these common discipline approaches don’t work, what does? The research consistently points to authoritative parenting practices:
Set clear, age-appropriate expectations: Children need to know what’s expected of them. Rules should be reasonable, consistent, and explained in terms children can understand.
Enforce limits consistently with warmth: When children violate rules, follow through with logical consequences—but maintain your connection with them. The message should be “I don’t like this behavior, but I always love you.”
Teach, don’t just punish: Use misbehavior as an opportunity to teach emotional regulation, problem-solving, perspective-taking, and social skills. Ask questions like “What could you do differently next time?” or “How do you think that made your sister feel?”
Encourage autonomy within boundaries: Give children age-appropriate choices and opportunities to make decisions. Allow them to experience natural consequences when safe to do so.
Maintain the relationship: Research consistently shows that discipline works through the parent-child relationship. Maintain warmth, show interest in their activities, spend positive time together, and communicate that they’re valued regardless of their behavior.
Use positive reinforcement: Notice and praise good behavior. Studies show that positive forms of discipline—including positive reinforcement—are related to better long-term outcomes including self-regulation, self-esteem, and internalization of appropriate behavioral standards.
Be patient with the process: Baumrind’s longitudinal research followed children from preschool through adolescence, showing that authoritative parenting yields competent, well-adjusted adolescents and young adults. But this is a long-term investment. The benefits accrue over years, not days.
When You’ve Been Using Ineffective Discipline
Maybe you’re reading this and recognizing that you’ve been relying on one or more of these counterproductive approaches. First, take a breath. Most parents use these strategies at some point because they’re culturally normalized, because they were used on us, or because they provide immediate relief even though they fail long-term.
The good news from research is that changing your approach can change outcomes. Children are remarkably resilient, and relationships can repair. Here’s how to shift:
Acknowledge the pattern to yourself: You can’t change what you don’t recognize. Be honest about which of these mistakes you’ve been making and how they’ve been affecting your child’s behavior.
Learn new strategies: Authoritative parenting involves specific skills that can be learned. Consider parenting programs, books based on research evidence, or working with a family therapist who can teach effective discipline approaches.
Explain the change to your child: “I’ve realized I haven’t been handling discipline in the best way. I’m going to work on doing better. We’re going to have clearer rules and I’m going to be more consistent, but I’m also going to yell less and we’ll talk through problems more.”
Be patient with yourself and your child: Changing ingrained patterns takes time. You’ll slip back into old habits sometimes. Your child might test whether the changes are real. Keep working at it.
Seek support when needed: If your child’s behavioral problems are severe, if you’re dealing with trauma or mental health issues (yours or theirs), or if you’re struggling to implement changes, professional help can make a huge difference.
The Long View
Discipline isn’t about winning battles in the moment. It’s about raising children who can eventually regulate their own behavior, make good decisions, treat others with respect, and function effectively in the world.
The decades of research since Baumrind’s pioneering work have consistently shown that authoritative parenting—high warmth combined with high standards, reasoning instead of coercion, teaching instead of just punishing—produces the best long-term outcomes. These children become adults with better mental health, stronger relationships, higher achievement, and more prosocial behavior.
The five discipline mistakes we’ve explored—physical punishment, harsh verbal discipline, inconsistency, punishing without teaching, and over-control—all fail because they violate the core principles that make discipline effective. They damage the parent-child relationship, they teach fear or rebellion rather than self-regulation, and they focus on short-term behavior suppression rather than long-term skill development.
Your child’s misbehavior is frustrating, exhausting, and sometimes publicly embarrassing. The temptation to react with harsh, immediate responses is strong. But when you understand that these reactions often make behavior worse over time, you can make different choices—choices backed by decades of research showing what actually works to raise children who are not just compliant, but genuinely well-adjusted, capable, and thriving.
That’s discipline done right. That’s the long view that changes lives.
What discipline approaches have you used that worked well or backfired? Have you recognized any of these mistakes in your own parenting? Share your experiences in the comments—we’re all learning together, and your honesty might help another parent make different choices.
If this article changed how you think about discipline, please share it with a parent who might benefit. The gap between what research shows works and what many parents actually do is wide—and it closes one family at a time as we learn better approaches.