Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T16:44:19.031Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intuitive theories inform children's beliefs about intergroup obligation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2020

Lisa Chalik Open the ORCID record for Lisa Chalik [Opens in a new window]
Lisa Chalik*
Affiliation:
Yeshiva University, Stern College for Women, Department of Psychology, New York, NY10016. [email protected]://www.developingmindslab.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In addition to emerging from children's direct experiences with collaborative partners and groups, children's beliefs about obligation also arise from a process of intuitive theory-building in early childhood. On this account, it is possible for at least some of children's beliefs to emerge in the absence of specific experiences where obligations are held among fellow members of a group “we.”

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 43 , 2020 , e65
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bar-Haim, Y., Ziv, T., Lamy, D. & Hodes, R. M. (2006) Nature and nurture in own-race face processing. Psychological Science 17(2):159–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01679.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bian, L., Sloane, S. & Baillargeon, R. (2018) Infants expect ingroup support to override fairness when resources are limited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115(11):2705–10. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719445115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chalik, L. & Dunham, Y. (2020) Beliefs about moral obligation structure children's social category-based expectations. Child Development 91(1):e108–e119. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chalik, L. & Rhodes, M. (2014) Preschoolers use social allegiances to predict behavior. Journal of Cognition and Development 15(1):136–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2012.728546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalik, L. & Rhodes, M. (2018) Learning about social category-based obligations. Cognitive Development 48:117–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2018.06.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalik, L., Rivera, C. & Rhodes, M. (2014) Children's use of categories and mental states to predict social behavior. Developmental Psychology 50(10):2360–67. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diesendruck, G. & Deblinger-Tangi, R. (2014) The linguistic construction of social categories in toddlers. Child Development 85(1):114–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fehr, E., Bernhard, H. & Rockenbach, B. (2008) Egalitarianism in young children. Nature 454(7208):1079–83. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07155.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haward, P., Wagner, L., Carey, S. & Prasada, S. (2018) The development of principled connections and kind representations. Cognition 176:255–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.001.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jin, K-S. & Baillargeon, R. (2017) Infants possess an abstract expectation of ingroup support. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(31):8199–04. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706286114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kinzler, K. D., Dupoux, E. & Spelke, E. S. (2007) The native language of social cognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104(30):12577–80. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0705345104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Misch, A., Over, H. & Carpenter, M. (2014, October) Stick with your group: Young children's attitudes about group loyalty. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 126:19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.02.008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Over, H. (2018, April) The influence of group membership on young children's prosocial behaviour. Current Opinion in Psychology 20:17–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Over, H., Vaish, A. & Tomasello, M. (2016, Oct.–Dec.) Do young children accept responsibility for the negative actions of ingroup members? Cognitive Development 40:24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2016.08.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prasada, S. & Dillingham, E. M. (2009) Representation of principled connections: A window onto the formal aspect of common sense conception. Cognitive Science 33(3):401–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01018.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quinn, P. C., Yahr, J., Kuhn, A., Slater, A. M. & Pascalis, O. (2002) Representation of the gender of human faces by infants: A preference for female. Perception 31(9):1109–21. https://doi.org/10.1068/p3331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, M. (2012) Naïve theories of social groups. Child Development 83(6):1900–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01835.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, M. (2013) How two intuitive theories shape the development of social categorization. Child Development Perspectives 7(1):12–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhodes, M., Leslie, S. J., Bianchi, L. & Chalik, L. (2018) The role of generic language in the early development of social categorization. Child Development 89(1):148–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12714.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ting, F., He, Z. & Baillargeon, R. (2019) Toddlers and infants expect individuals to refrain from helping an ingroup victim's aggressor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116(13):6025–34. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817849116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wellman, H. & Gelman, S. A. (1992) Cognitive development: Foundational theories of core domains. Annual Review of Psychology 43(1):337–75. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.43.1.337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed