Children's moral evaluations of reporting the transgressions of peers: Age differences in evaluations of tattling.

Abstract

The way children evaluate the reporting of peers' transgressions to authority figures was investigated. Participants, ages 6 -11 years (N = 60), were presented with a series of vignettes, each of which depicted a child who committed either a minor transgression (such as not finishing the vegetables at lunch) or a more serious transgression (such as stealing from a classmate). Participants were asked to evaluate the decision of a child observer who either did or did not report the transgression to a teacher. Younger children considered reporting to be appropriate for both types of transgressions, but older children considered reporting to be appropriate for major transgressions only. Results are interpreted with reference to (a) a changing peer culture in which the social cost of reporting transgressions increases and (b) a developmental change in children's cognitive capabilities. Keywordstattling; truth-telling; moral evaluation; honesty From an early age, children are taught that it is important to tell the truth (Bussey, 1992). However, telling the truth sometimes comes into conflict with other social values, such as protecting people's feelings (Bussey, 1999;Ma, Xu, Heyman, & Lee, 2011). The present research focuses on another context in which truth-telling can conflict with other social values: when reporting the transgressions of peers to authority figures. student who helps to enforce rules that promote fairness, or they might consider such reporting to be disloyal. Reporting on transgressions also has broader societal implications, such as in promoting efforts for harm prevention (Brank et al., 2007;Syvertsen, Flanagan, & Stout, 2009).Children engage in tattling behavior-defined as the reporting of another person's violation of a normative expectation to a third party-starting as early as 18 months of age (Dunn & Munn, 1985). In preschool and early primary school-age children, tattling is prevalent and does not generally carry negative consequences (den Bak & Ross, 1996;Ingram & Bering, 2010;Ross & den Bak-Lammers, 1998). In contrast, in adolescence there can be substantial negative consequences (Friman et al., 2004), such as being labeled as a "snitch" or "narc" (Syvertsen et al., 2009). Even without an objective increase in the social costs of tattling, older children may worry more about potential costs as they become increasingly aware of how they are likely to be perceived by others (Banerjee & Yuill, 1999;Bennett & Yeeles, 1990;Gee & Heyman, 2007;Heyman, Fu, & Lee, 2007;Juvonen & Murdock, 1995;Vasey, Crnic, & Carter, 1994).Evaluations of the reporting of transgressions may depend upon the type of transgression involved (Nucci, 1981(Nucci, , 2001Smetana, 2006;Turiel, 2008). For example, children as young as 3 years of age tend to view violations of moral rules, such as treating someone unfairly, as more serious and more generally wrong than violations of social conventions, such as using inappropriate table manners (Smetana & Braeges, 1990;Smetana, Schlagman, & Adams, 1993). Furthermore, eve...

Who Is the Tattletale? Linking Individual Differences in Socioemotional Competence and Anxiety to Tattling Behavior and Attitudes in Young Children

“…The previous study found that young schoolage children have positive views about tattling regardless of the type of transgression, whereas older children remain positive only regarding major transgressions. Despite working with younger children, we were able to compare the current findings with the results for the first two age groups of Chiu Loke et al (2011), although in our case children were still attending preschool. Comparing means and standard deviations with those from the Chiu Loke et al…”

“…Another research question involved the assessment of attitudes toward reporting transgressions, measured with a procedure adapted from the previous study of Chiu Loke et al (2011) and administered to a younger sample. The previous study found that young schoolage children have positive views about tattling regardless of the type of transgression, whereas older children remain positive only regarding major transgressions.…”

“…More specifically, as children get older and develop better working memory and inhibition, they refrain from the desire to tell the truth and reflect on other people's perspectives and on the consequences of their report. It could also mean that children at this stage begin to ponder the social ramifications of tattling, realizing that it could cost them their belonging to a certain group and starting to think about the severity of the transgression as an important modulator of their tattling behavior and attitude (Chiu Loke et al, 2011).…”

“…Tattling can be essentially defined as the reporting of another person's violation of a normative expectation to a third party, a behavior emerging as early as 18 months of age (Dunn & Munn, 1985). It has been widely documented in several settings, varying from family (Ross, Smith, Spielmacher, & Recchia, 2004) to preschool and other educational (Chiu Loke, Heyman, Forgie, McCarthy, & Lee, 2011;Ingram & Bering, 2010;Lancelotta & Vaughn, 1989) environments as well as to controlled experimental settings tattling between siblings reduces significantly from ages 4 to 6. It is proposed that by the time children reach adolescence such a behavior could render negative consequences from peers as well as adults and would therefore be used less frequently and in a covert manner (Friman et al, 2004;Ingram & Bering, 2010).…”

The Impacts of Moral Evaluations and Descriptive Norms on Children's and Adolescents’ Tolerance of Transgression

“…Some researchers have found that children and adolescents may be more tolerant of occasional and minor transgressions with increasing age, such as accidentally spilling a classmate's juice or pushing a classmate to the ground (Loke, Heyman, Forgie, McCarthy, & Lee, 2011;Loke, Heyman, Itakura, & Toriyama, 2014). However, few studies have examined children's and adolescents' tolerance of more common and serious illegal transgressions, such as bribery in the school context.…”