Literature DB >> 35310214

Children Consider Procedures, Outcomes, and Emotions When Judging the Fairness of Inequality.

Lucy M Stowe1, Rebecca Peretz-Lange2, Peter R Blake3.   

Abstract

Children tend to view equal resource distributions as more fair than unequal ones, but will sometimes view even unequal distributions as fair. However, less is known about how children form judgments about inequality when different procedures are used. In the present study, we investigated children's consideration of procedures (i.e., resource-distributing processes), outcomes (i.e., the distributions themselves), and emotions (i.e., the emotional reactions of those receiving the resources) when judging the fairness of unequal resource distributions. Participants (N = 130, 3- to 8-year-olds) were introduced to a Fair Coin (different color on each side) and an Unfair Coin (same color on both sides). In two between-subjects conditions, they watched a researcher flip either the Fair or Unfair Coin in order to distribute resources unequally between two child recipients. Participants then rated the fairness of this event, provided verbal justifications for their ratings (coded for references to procedures and/or outcomes), and rated the emotional state of each recipient (from which an Emotion Difference Score was computed). Results revealed that participants rated the event as more fair in the Fair Coin than the Unfair Coin condition. References to the outcome in children's justifications predicted lower fairness ratings, while references to the procedure only predicted lower ratings in the Unfair Coin condition. Greater Emotion Difference Scores predicted lower fairness ratings, and this effect increased with age. Together, these results show that children consider procedures, outcomes, and emotions when judging the fairness of inequality. Moreover, results suggest age-related increases in consideration of recipients' emotions makes inequality seem less fair, even when fair procedures are used. Implications for the development of fairness are discussed.
Copyright © 2022 Stowe, Peretz-Lange and Blake.

Entities:  

Keywords:  development; distributive justice; emotions; fairness judgments; procedures

Year:  2022        PMID: 35310214      PMCID: PMC8927918          DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.815901

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Front Psychol        ISSN: 1664-1078


  46 in total

1.  Toddlers' prosocial behavior: from instrumental to empathic to altruistic helping.

Authors:  Margarita Svetlova; Sara R Nichols; Celia A Brownell
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec

2.  Scarce Resource Allocation During Disasters: A Mixed-Method Community Engagement Study.

Authors:  E Lee Daugherty Biddison; Howard S Gwon; Monica Schoch-Spana; Alan C Regenberg; Chrissie Juliano; Ruth R Faden; Eric S Toner
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 9.410

3.  Young children understand the normative force of standards of equal resource distribution.

Authors:  Hannes Rakoczy; Marlen Kaufmann; Karoline Lohse
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2016-06-18

4.  Children's and Adults' Views of Punishment as a Path to Redemption.

Authors:  James P Dunlea; Larisa Heiphetz
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2021-01-19

5.  Foundations of cooperation in young children.

Authors:  Kristina R Olson; Elizabeth S Spelke
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2008-01-28

6.  First steps towards an understanding of procedural fairness.

Authors:  Luca Surian; Francesco Margoni
Journal:  Dev Sci       Date:  2020-01-23

7.  The development of recipient-dependent sharing behavior and sharing expectations in preschool children.

Authors:  Markus Paulus; Chris Moore
Journal:  Dev Psychol       Date:  2013-08-26

8.  Is Defensive Behavior a Subtype of Prosocial Behaviors?

Authors:  Alessandra Geraci; Laura Franchin
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-06-23

9.  I should but I won't: why young children endorse norms of fair sharing but do not follow them.

Authors:  Craig E Smith; Peter R Blake; Paul L Harris
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.