4.2 Article

Two and a half-year-old children are prosocial even when their partners are not

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY
卷 116, 期 2, 页码 186-198

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2013.05.007

关键词

Prosocial behavior; Other-oriented preferences; Contingent reciprocity; Prosocial Game; Toddlers; Developmental and comparative perspectives

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A total of 33 2.5-year-old toddlers were tested for proactive and selective prosocial responding in an iterated Prosocial Game with unfamiliar adult partners who were communicatively neutral and alternated their roles as actors and recipients every other trial. When children were actors, they were required to choose, at no cost to themselves, between a selfish option that delivered a reward to them only (1/0) and a prosocial option that delivered identical rewards to both themselves and their partners (1/1). When adult partners were actors, they consistently behaved prosocially (1/1) or selfishly (1/0) over 10 alternating trials, depending on test condition. An additional 17 children were used as a recipient-absent control group to test for self-oriented versus other-oriented prosocial preferences. This study shows that by 2.5 years of age, and in the particular context of the task administered, toddlers can display proactive, other-oriented prosocial behavior, but their prosocial responding is indiscriminate in that they fail to respond contingently to their partners' prosocial or selfish behavior in the previous trials. These findings lend further support to the view that human prosociality is in place early in development as a basic tendency to be nice to others. This inclination may be so strong that not even partners who are communicatively neutral or repeatedly selfish toward children can erode it. They also suggest that this precocious proactive prosociality may be independent of reciprocity in terms of both its developmental schedule and psychological scaffolding. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据