Poster #130 - Testing Young Children's Normative Development With Peer and Adult Informants of Norms and Preferences

• In Event: 1-115 - Poster Session 03
  In Poster Session: PS 03 Section - Moral Development

Integrative Statement

An influential review of research on normative development (Tomasello & Vaish, 2013) suggests that children’s normative understanding develops in two steps. In the first step, children 1–3 years old relate to others on a solely dyadic basis (even when they are in groups). Although children 1–3 years old have prosocial orientations (e.g., offering instrumental help and comforting those in distress), they do not yet conceptualize norms as group-level expectations. In the second step, children at 3–4 begin to participate in groups qua groups and to conceptualize norms as group-level expectations. It is not until 3 years, for instance, that children protest and tattle on third-party norm violations (Schmidt & Tomasello, 2012).

Although Tomasello and Vaish (2013) constructed their two-step hypothesis with considerable suggestive evidence (e.g., regarding children’s protests), no study has directly tested their proposal (e.g., by comparing children of different ages on tasks that conceptually distinguish dyadic versus group-minded orientations). We address this gap with two studies. We compare how 2.5-year-olds and 4.5-year-olds interpret others’ testimonies of norms and preferences. Norms and preferences are similar in that they both follow a world-to-mind direction of fit (Searle, 2001). They differ, however, in that norms generalize to other members of the group, whereas preferences are limited to the individual. If 2.5-year-olds interpret norms as individual imperatives, they will respond similarly to norms and preferences.

In both studies, children set up a pretend tea party. Children are led to believe that they are video chatting with someone in another room (the informant). In Study 1, the informant is an adult. In Study 2, the informant is a child. In pre-recorded videos, the informant describes tea party items with either norms (“For tea parties at our school, we always use this plate”) or preferences (“For my tea party today, I feel like using this plate”). In a within-subjects design, each child observes two norm testimonies and two preference testimonies from the informant. For each item (plates, cups, teas, and snacks), children first watch the testimony about that item and then select which one, from a set of 4 choices for that item, to set up for the tea party.

The hypothesis is that 4.5-year-olds, but not 2.5-year-olds, will prioritize norms over preferences in their item selections. Because 2.5-year-olds interpret norms as individual directives, they will not distinguish between norm and preference testimonies. However, children at 4.5 years will comply more with norm testimonies than with preference testimonies. These predictions are supported by initial data from 7 participants (data collection is ongoing but expected to be complete by early in the new year; 21 pilot participants have also participated). For 2.5-year-olds, compliance to both norms and preferences is 0%. For 4.5-year-olds, however, compliance to norms is 60% and compliance to preferences is 40% (collapsing across informant types). In closing, this study provides a conceptually precise test of the influential two-step hypothesis by Tomasello and Vaish (2013). Results will shed light on the developmental origins of children’s normativity and group-mindedness.

Authors

• Leon Li, Duke University
  Presenting Author

• Bari Lauren Britvan, Duke University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Michael Tomasello, Duke University
  Non-Presenting Author