基于社会边界的道德梯度:当资源有限时,儿童优先考虑自己和他们的内部群体

IF 1.8 2区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Journal of Experimental Child Psychology Pub Date : 2024-11-29 DOI:10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106125
Mioko Sudo, Mitsuhiko Ishikawa
{"title":"基于社会边界的道德梯度:当资源有限时,儿童优先考虑自己和他们的内部群体","authors":"Mioko Sudo,&nbsp;Mitsuhiko Ishikawa","doi":"10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In an ideal world, there would be sufficient resources to be fairly allocated to everyone. The reality, however, is that resources are often limited. How do children navigate resource distribution decisions in the face of scarcity and sufficiency? Our study consisted of two experiments with 4- to 12-year-olds (<em>N</em> = 96), where children were required to distribute resources among themselves, a gender ingroup member, and a gender outgroup member when there was a limited number of resources (Experiment 1) and when there were sufficient resources for an equitable distribution (Experiment 2). When resources were limited, children demonstrated an overall tendency to allocate more resources to themselves and the gender ingroup member at a disadvantage of the gender outgroup member. However, children were not indifferent to the welfare of the gender outgroup member, as evidenced by their tendency to minimize the disadvantage that the gender outgroup member experienced. Furthermore, when the number of resources allowed for an equitable distribution, children showed a robust tendency to fairly allocate the same number of resources to each individual. Thus, our findings suggest that children were acting on a moral gradient, whereby they included both the gender ingroup member and the gender outgroup member within their moral considerations, albeit demonstrating slight favoritism toward the former.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48391,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","volume":"251 ","pages":"Article 106125"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moral gradients based on social boundaries: Children prioritize themselves and their ingroup when resources are limited\",\"authors\":\"Mioko Sudo,&nbsp;Mitsuhiko Ishikawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>In an ideal world, there would be sufficient resources to be fairly allocated to everyone. The reality, however, is that resources are often limited. How do children navigate resource distribution decisions in the face of scarcity and sufficiency? Our study consisted of two experiments with 4- to 12-year-olds (<em>N</em> = 96), where children were required to distribute resources among themselves, a gender ingroup member, and a gender outgroup member when there was a limited number of resources (Experiment 1) and when there were sufficient resources for an equitable distribution (Experiment 2). When resources were limited, children demonstrated an overall tendency to allocate more resources to themselves and the gender ingroup member at a disadvantage of the gender outgroup member. However, children were not indifferent to the welfare of the gender outgroup member, as evidenced by their tendency to minimize the disadvantage that the gender outgroup member experienced. Furthermore, when the number of resources allowed for an equitable distribution, children showed a robust tendency to fairly allocate the same number of resources to each individual. Thus, our findings suggest that children were acting on a moral gradient, whereby they included both the gender ingroup member and the gender outgroup member within their moral considerations, albeit demonstrating slight favoritism toward the former.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology\",\"volume\":\"251 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106125\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096524002650\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096524002650","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在一个理想的世界里,应该有足够的资源公平地分配给每个人。然而,现实情况是,资源往往是有限的。面对稀缺和充足的资源,孩子们如何进行资源分配决策?我们的研究包括两个实验,对象为4- 12岁的儿童(N = 96),在实验1中,儿童被要求在资源有限的情况下(实验1),在资源足够公平分配的情况下(实验2),在他们自己、一个性别内群体成员和一个性别外群体成员之间分配资源。儿童总体上倾向于将更多的资源分配给自己和性别群体内的成员,而不是性别群体外的成员。然而,儿童并非对性别外群体成员的福利漠不关心,这可以从他们倾向于将性别外群体成员所经历的不利因素最小化的趋势中得到证明。此外,当资源数量允许公平分配时,孩子们表现出一种强烈的倾向,即公平地将相同数量的资源分配给每个人。因此,我们的研究结果表明,儿童的行为是基于道德梯度的,即他们在道德考虑中同时考虑了群体内性别成员和群体外性别成员,尽管表现出对前者的轻微偏爱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Moral gradients based on social boundaries: Children prioritize themselves and their ingroup when resources are limited
In an ideal world, there would be sufficient resources to be fairly allocated to everyone. The reality, however, is that resources are often limited. How do children navigate resource distribution decisions in the face of scarcity and sufficiency? Our study consisted of two experiments with 4- to 12-year-olds (N = 96), where children were required to distribute resources among themselves, a gender ingroup member, and a gender outgroup member when there was a limited number of resources (Experiment 1) and when there were sufficient resources for an equitable distribution (Experiment 2). When resources were limited, children demonstrated an overall tendency to allocate more resources to themselves and the gender ingroup member at a disadvantage of the gender outgroup member. However, children were not indifferent to the welfare of the gender outgroup member, as evidenced by their tendency to minimize the disadvantage that the gender outgroup member experienced. Furthermore, when the number of resources allowed for an equitable distribution, children showed a robust tendency to fairly allocate the same number of resources to each individual. Thus, our findings suggest that children were acting on a moral gradient, whereby they included both the gender ingroup member and the gender outgroup member within their moral considerations, albeit demonstrating slight favoritism toward the former.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Child Psychology is an excellent source of information concerning all aspects of the development of children. It includes empirical psychological research on cognitive, social/emotional, and physical development. In addition, the journal periodically publishes Special Topic issues.
期刊最新文献
The relation of verbal and nonverbal skills to basic numerical processing of preterm versus term-born preschoolers. Do children match described probabilities? The sampling hypothesis applied to repeated risky choice. Is counting a bad idea? Complex relations among children's fraction knowledge, eye movements, and performance in visual fraction comparisons. Can gamification improve children's performance in mental rotation? Examining the factor structure of the home learning environment.
×
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