Pacifists and Revenge-Seekers in Response to Unambiguous Peer Provocation

McDonald, Kristina L.; Asher, Steven R.

doi:10.1007/s10964-017-0767-4

Cited by 22 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, our sample included equal numbers of boys and girls, allowing us to examine gender differences in youths' descriptions of their own retaliatory desires and actions. Consistent with well-established gender differences in aggressive behavior (Rose & Rudolph, 2006), some studies reveal that boys report more revenge goals than girls (e.g., McDonald & Asher, 2018;Rose & Asher, 1999) whereas these gender effects are less evident in response to serious transgressions or betrayal of relationship expectations (MacEvoy & Asher, 2012). Thus, we tentatively expected that boys would report desiring and carrying out revenge more frequently than girls.…”

Section: The Current Studysupporting

confidence: 71%

“…The literature provides less guidance about children's explanations for containing their desires for revenge. McDonald and Asher (2018) found that children who eschewed desires for revenge tended to focus on the importance of maintaining relationships, and were less likely to endorse the legitimacy of aggression. Relatedly, research on children's moral judgments of revenge demonstrates that children typically judge retaliation negatively, and they do so on the basis of moral concerns with others' welfare (e.g., it would hurt him) but also more prudential/pragmatic considerations (e.g., I could get in trouble; Smetana, Campione-Barr, & Yell, 2003).…”

Section: Past Research On Retaliation In Childhood and Adolescencementioning

confidence: 97%

“…Furthermore, McDonald and Asher (2018) found that even in response to hypothetical conflict vignettes depicting unambiguously provocative behavior, the majority of youth did not indicate that they would want revenge. In their study, those who acknowledged revenge goals tended to report more anger in response to harm, were more sensitive to disrespect, and endorsed the legitimacy of revenge and negative reciprocity norms.…”

Section: Past Research On Retaliation In Childhood and Adolescencementioning

confidence: 98%

“…Although children do describe sometimes engaging in morally laden actions that they believe to be wrong (Wainryb, Brehl, & Matwin, 2005), we expected that youth would typically describe not acting out their retaliatory desires, given various moral, relational, and pragmatic constraints that may serve to inhibit retaliatory action (e.g., McDonald & Asher, 2018;Smetana et al, 2003). However, we had competing hypotheses about age-related changes.…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

“I wanted to hurt her”: Children’s and adolescents’ experiences of desiring and seeking revenge in their own peer conflicts

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined children's and adolescents' descriptions of wanting and seeking revenge in peer conflicts. A total of 100 youth divided into three age groups (7-, 11-, and 16-year-olds) were interviewed about experiences in which they wanted to get back at a peer who harmed them. Most youth recalled experiencing retaliatory desires, but typically indicated that such desires were not acted out; 7-year olds were less likely than older youth to describe carrying out their retaliatory desires.Youths' reasons for seeking revenge versus containing their retaliatory desires revealed age effects in their thinking about their own retaliation. Younger children's reasoning focused on the undesirability of harming others and potential punishments that could ensue, but they generally did not coordinate these concerns with the fact that they themselves had just been harmed. In contrast, older youth described their own retaliatory actions as driven by goals stemming from being deeply hurt, but such goals were balanced against their self-protective motives, sensitivity to the particularities of transgressions, and self-reflective moral commitments. Findings underscore that desires for revenge can be considered to be a part of children's experiences of conflict, but also crucially, that youth recognize their own capacities to contain and redirect these desires. K E Y W O R D Sadolescence, childhood, conflict, peer relations, retaliation, revenge goals | 841 RECCHIA Et Al.

show abstract

Section: The Current Studysupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Past Research On Retaliation In Childhood and Adolescencementioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Past Research On Retaliation In Childhood and Adolescencementioning

confidence: 98%

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

“I wanted to hurt her”: Children’s and adolescents’ experiences of desiring and seeking revenge in their own peer conflicts

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, findings that children grasp that apologies mitigate distress (e.g., Smith et al, ) and that the offender's intention matters (e.g., Girard & Mullet, ) suggest that relative to non‐forgiveness, forgiveness narratives will feature more apologetic responses from the offender and more benign attributions about the offender's intentions. Evidence from studies on children's responses to peer provocation and conflict suggests that narratives of forgiveness, relative to non‐forgiveness, will feature narrators who did not retaliate, felt less intense or enduring anger, and had positive relational goals (McDonald & Asher, ; Peets, Hodges, & Salmivalli, ), as well as more positive relational outcomes (MacEvoy & Asher, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

To err is human: Forgiveness across childhood and adolescence

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined children's and adolescents' narrative accounts and evaluations of an instance when they forgave a peer and an instance when they did not forgive, as well as their definitions of what it means to forgive. The sample included 100 participants in three age groups (7‐, 11‐, and 16‐year olds). Regardless of age, forgiveness and non‐forgiveness accounts differed in interpersonal features, such as how they responded when hurt and whether the peer apologized. The psychological features of the experiences involving their own thoughts and feelings also distinguished between events that were forgiven and those that were not, but did so for 16‐year olds and, sometimes, for 11‐year olds, but never for 7‐year olds. The distinct ways in which younger and older children narrated their experiences also were reflected in their evolving definitions of what it means to forgive, though children's definitions revealed aspects of their thinking not captured in their narratives. Finally, children at all ages judged forgiving favorably but, with age, their evaluations of not forgiving became less negative. These findings challenge the narrow conceptual and methodological lenses through which forgiveness had been examined, and underscore meaningful age differences in the ways children make sense of and evaluate forgiveness and non‐forgiveness.

show abstract