Preschool Children’s Evaluations of Prototypic and Accidental Moral Transgressions Differ by Economic Strata

Bibliographic Data

ID21615693
AuthorsErin Ruth Baker (0000-0002-6750-1331, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York, corresponding author), Rong Huang (0000-0002-5840-3553, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York), Qingyang Liu (0000-0003-4062-6764, Syracuse University), Carmela Battista (Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York), Jamie Gahtan (0000-0002-0847-4580, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York)
Year2024
Volume35
Issue2
Pages220-233
Publication date2024-02-17
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueEarly Education and Development (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1040-9289 • E-ISSN: 1556-6935
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/10409289.2022.2133851
OpenAlexW4306849687
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited49

Research Findings: Research with older children and adults reliably demonstrates that individuals raised in poverty tend to evaluate concerns related to moral concerns (i.e., related to harm, welfare, and justice) differently than do wealthier individuals. However, little work has examined these patterns in young children. Children (N=214, Mage = 53.30 months, SD = 18.3 months) completed tasks regarding accidental and prototypic moral transgressions, and a standard verbal assessment. Parents reported family size and household income, which were used to compute individuals’ income-to-needs ratio (INR) compared to federal standards. Using generalized linear mixed modeling (GLMM), a repeated-measure analysis, results indicate that children in low-income families (INR < 2.0) were more lenient in how they evaluate both accidental and prototypic issues, compared to more affluent children. Moreover, they were more likely to evaluate issues based on communal welfare (e.g., equitable resource distribution), whereas more affluent children were more likely to reference psychological harm. Practice or Policy: Practitioners and researchers of early childhood should be cognizant and sensitive to differences in children’s social understanding. We encourage scholars to use a strength-based, adaptive approach in future research on children’s cognition, particularly involving SES, class, and the like

Accidental · Developmental psychology · Economic growth · Economic Justice · Harm · Population · Poverty · Socioeconomic status · Sociology · Welfare · Cultural Differences and Values · Demography · Emotions and Moral Behavior · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOI