A Reexamination of the Effects of Intent and Consequence on Children's Moral Judgments

Moral emotions and the envisaging of mitigating circumstances for wrongdoing

“…A large body of research has shown that adults and children alike reduce their condemnation of harm when it is committed unintentionally or by accident (Costanzo, Coie, Grumet, & Farnill, 1973;Cushman, 2008;Karniol, 1979), without foresight of the risks (Lagnado & Channon, 2008), under duress or coercion (Woolfolk et al, 2006), as just punishment, Running head: MORAL EMOTIONS AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES 4 training, instruction, or discipline (Rule & Duker, 1973;Sousa, Holbrook, & Piazza, 2009), as selfdefense or retribution for a prior offense (Darley et al, 1978;Hewitt, 1975), out of necessity or in the service of a greater good (Darely et al, 1978;Nichols & Mallon, 2006;Sousa et al, 2009), or harm intended to help rather than to injure (Rule, Nesdale, & McAra, 1974). Less is currently known about the mitigating circumstances that may differentially influence people's anger or disgust as evoked by categories of wrongdoing not necessarily related to harm, for example, acts that violate societal norms about sexual or bodily purity (e.g., incest, paraphilia; see Gutierrez & Giner-Sorolla, 2007;Haidt, Koller, & Dias, 1993;Prinz, 2007;Rozin, Lowery, Imada, & Haidt, 1999;Russell & Giner-Sorolla, in press;Tybur, Lieberman, & Griskevicius, 2009;Young & Saxe, 2011).…”

Valence Effects in Reasoning about Evaluative Traits

“…As children build upon these constructs to make inferences about what particular individuals are like over time and across situations, they must learn to draw from a wide range of evidence, including valence-based information. For example, if a child is attempting to determine whether a person is trustworthy, he or she must determine not only which behaviors are relevant to the trait, but also how much weight to give to evidence that is consistent versus inconsistent with the trait.Valence effects in children's reasoning about traits have been seen in a number of studies (e.g., Benenson & Dweck, 1986;Costanzo, Coie, Grumet, & Farnill, 1973;Heyman & Gelman, 1998, 1999Nelson, 1980;Wigfield, 1988). There are, however, many unanswered questions about the role of valence in children's inferences (see Ruble & Dweck, 1995;Yuill, 1992).…”

Influence of social factors in the development of the young child's moral judgment

“…Although studies by Costanzo, Coie, Grumet and Farnill (1973) and by Austin, Ruble and Trabasso (1977) have demonstrated an effect of order and of intent versus consequence in the children's moral responses, we did not deviate from Piaget's original technique, so that early and contemporary results could be more directly compared. We then designed an instrument based on the same 'moral dilemma' technique, presenting a story of a child committing a reprehensible action toward an adult as opposed to a child committing an identical reprehensible action toward a peer.…”