Multidimensional profiles of Head Start children's social behaviors predict their interpretations of physical aggression

IF 2.7 2区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES Aggressive Behavior Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI:10.1002/ab.22099
Erin Ruth Baker, Jamie Gahtan, Sumaita Binta Salim, Rong Huang
{"title":"Multidimensional profiles of Head Start children's social behaviors predict their interpretations of physical aggression","authors":"Erin Ruth Baker,&nbsp;Jamie Gahtan,&nbsp;Sumaita Binta Salim,&nbsp;Rong Huang","doi":"10.1002/ab.22099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Preschool children's reasoning regarding moral events differs according to adversity and relates to aggression. Understanding morality in young children is paramount for understanding their aggressive behaviors. The study aims to identify patterns of aggression and prosocial behavior using Latent Class Analysis (LCA) and investigate how patterns of aggression and prosocial behavior relate to reasoning about prototypic moral events. One hundred six children (<i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 4.40 years old, SD = 0.55 years old, Range: 3.08–5.33 years old, 51% boys) enrolled in Head Start programs and their caregivers participated. In the fall caregivers completed surveys on forms (i.e., the manifestation of behavior) and functions of aggression (i.e., motivation of behavior), and prosocial behavior. The following spring children completed two moral reasoning tasks that measured children's judgment and reasoning of harm, and their attributions of transgressors' reasoning. The LCA revealed a 3-class solution: (1) high levels of relational aggression and moderate levels of prosocial behavior (<i>bistrategic controllers</i>), (2) low levels of both aggression and average prosocial behavior (<i>uninvolved</i>), (3) high levels of all types of aggression and low levels of prosocial behavior (<i>high aggression</i>). Subsequent analyses suggest that uninvolved children prioritize adhering to authority over other concerns, and bistrategic controllers focused on goal-oriented reasoning. Overall, our findings support that recognizing patterns of behavior may be useful in understanding children's moral reasoning.</p>","PeriodicalId":50842,"journal":{"name":"Aggressive Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aggressive Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ab.22099","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Preschool children's reasoning regarding moral events differs according to adversity and relates to aggression. Understanding morality in young children is paramount for understanding their aggressive behaviors. The study aims to identify patterns of aggression and prosocial behavior using Latent Class Analysis (LCA) and investigate how patterns of aggression and prosocial behavior relate to reasoning about prototypic moral events. One hundred six children (Mage = 4.40 years old, SD = 0.55 years old, Range: 3.08–5.33 years old, 51% boys) enrolled in Head Start programs and their caregivers participated. In the fall caregivers completed surveys on forms (i.e., the manifestation of behavior) and functions of aggression (i.e., motivation of behavior), and prosocial behavior. The following spring children completed two moral reasoning tasks that measured children's judgment and reasoning of harm, and their attributions of transgressors' reasoning. The LCA revealed a 3-class solution: (1) high levels of relational aggression and moderate levels of prosocial behavior (bistrategic controllers), (2) low levels of both aggression and average prosocial behavior (uninvolved), (3) high levels of all types of aggression and low levels of prosocial behavior (high aggression). Subsequent analyses suggest that uninvolved children prioritize adhering to authority over other concerns, and bistrategic controllers focused on goal-oriented reasoning. Overall, our findings support that recognizing patterns of behavior may be useful in understanding children's moral reasoning.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Head Start儿童社交行为的多维特征预测了他们对身体攻击的解释。
学龄前儿童对道德事件的推理因逆境而异,并与攻击性有关。理解幼儿的道德对于理解他们的攻击行为至关重要。本研究旨在使用潜在类别分析(LCA)来识别攻击性和亲社会行为模式,并调查攻击性和亲社会行为模式与原型道德事件推理的关系。106个孩子(法师 = 4.40岁,SD = 0.55岁,年龄范围:3.08-5.33岁,51%为男孩)及其护理人员参加了Head Start项目。秋季,护理人员完成了对攻击性(即行为动机)和亲社会行为的形式(即行为表现)和功能的调查。第二年春天,孩子们完成了两项道德推理任务,测量了孩子们对伤害的判断和推理,以及他们对违规者推理的归因。LCA揭示了一个三类解决方案:(1)高水平的关系攻击性和中等水平的亲社会行为(双策略控制器),(2)低水平的攻击性和平均亲社会行为,(3)所有类型的攻击性高水平和低水平的亲社会行为(高攻击性)。随后的分析表明,不参与的儿童将坚持权威置于其他关注之上,而双策略控制者则专注于目标导向的推理。总的来说,我们的研究结果支持识别行为模式可能有助于理解儿童的道德推理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Aggressive Behavior
Aggressive Behavior 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.40%
发文量
52
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Aggressive Behavior will consider manuscripts in the English language concerning the fields of Animal Behavior, Anthropology, Ethology, Psychiatry, Psychobiology, Psychology, and Sociology which relate to either overt or implied conflict behaviors. Papers concerning mechanisms underlying or influencing behaviors generally regarded as aggressive and the physiological and/or behavioral consequences of being subject to such behaviors will fall within the scope of the journal. Review articles will be considered as well as empirical and theoretical articles. Aggressive Behavior is the official journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression.
期刊最新文献
Beyond Eyeball Tests: A Methodical Rebuttal to Fillon et al.'s Commentary Violent Video Game Play and (De)Sensitization to Threat Development and validation of the Forms and Functions of Aggressive Behavior Scale Parental control and bullying: Variable-centered and person-centered approaches Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1