Five‐year‐old children value reasons in apologies for belief‐based accidents

Abstract

Accidents can be intent‐based (unintended action‐unintended outcome) or belief‐based (intended action‐unintended outcome). As compared to intent‐based accidents, giving reasons is more crucial for belief‐based accidents because the transgressor appears to have intentionally transgressed. In Study 1, UK‐based preschoolers who were native English speakers (N = 96, 53 girls, collected 2020–2021) witnessed two intent‐based or belief‐based accidents; one transgressor apologized, the other apologized with a reason. Five‐year‐olds, but not 4‐year‐olds, favored the reason‐giving transgressor following a belief‐based accident but not an intent‐based accident (where an apology sufficed). In Study 2, 5‐year‐olds (N = 48, 25 girls, collected 2021) distinguished between “good” and “bad” reasons for the harm caused. Thus, 5‐year‐old children recognize when reasons should accompany apologies and account for the quality of these reasons.