Poster #126 - Children’s Use of Reparative Prosocial Behaviors Following a Transgression Reduces Guilty Feelings

• In Event: 2-055 - Poster Session 06
  In Poster Session: PS 06 Section - Moral Development

Integrative Statement

Guilt theoretically functions to motivate reparative behaviors, which, in turn, function to alleviate guilt and prevent psychopathology (e.g., Quiles & Bybee, 1997). Although several studies in adults have demonstrated that guilt and reparative behaviors function as theorized (e.g., de Hooge, 2012), research has not investigated causal relations between guilt and reparative behaviors in children. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine whether guilt motivates children’s reparative behaviors, and whether their reparative behaviors successfully alleviate guilt. Six-to ten-year olds (N = 97) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions. In the experimental condition, children were led to believe that they had transgressed to cause a peer’s distress. Children self-reported their guilt following the pretend transgression by rating the extent to which they felt “guilty,” “sorry,” and “bad” on a visual 5-point likert scale; items were averaged to create a composite score (Cryder, Springer, & Morewedge, 2012). Then, children had the opportunity to repair the transgression by giving stickers and writing a note to the victimized peer. Following the repair opportunity, children self-reported their guilt a second time. In the no-guilt condition, children were led to believe that they caused a peer’s positive emotions. In the no-repair condition, children were led to believe that they had transgressed, but were not given a repair opportunity. Two measures of reparative behavior were scored or rated. The first reparative behavior measure was the number of stickers given to the victimized peer on a 6-point likert scale from 0 to 5 stickers. Second, the presence and sophistication of children’s prosocial statements (e.g., statements of comfort/concern, apologies) in their notes to the peer were rated on a 4-point scale (0=absent, 3=sophisticated) and used as a second reparative behavior measure. First, we examined whether guilt motivated reparative behavior. There was a significant effect of condition on the number of stickers given, F(1,62) = 6.41, p = .01, ηp2 = .09. Children in the experimental condition (i.e., children who felt guilty) gave significantly more stickers than children in the no-guilt condition (Mdiff = .64, SE = .25). There was also a significant effect of condition on the note ratings, F(1,61) = 5.51, p = .02, ηp2 = .08. The notes of children in the experimental condition were rated to be significantly more prosocial than the notes of children in the no-guilt condition (Mdiff = .49, SE = .21). Second, we examined whether reparative behaviors reduced guilt. There was a statistically significant interaction between condition and time on guilt scores, F(1, 61) = 14.464, p < .001. There was a statistically significant effect of time on guilt for the experimental, F(1, 29) = 15.88, p < .001, but not the no-repair condition, F(1, 32) = .09, p = .76. In the experimental condition only, as time increased, guilt decreased, b = -.88, t(29) = -3.99, p < .001. Results demonstrate that guilt and reparative behaviors function as theorized in children and may begin to inform reparative interventions aimed at preventing unalleviated, maladaptive guilt and psychopathology.

Authors

• Meghan Rose Donohue, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis
  Presenting Author

• Erin C Tully, Georgia State University
  Non-Presenting Author