Cargando…

Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training

Typically, adults give a primary role to the agent’s intention to harm when performing a moral judgment of accidental harm. By contrast, children often focus on outcomes, underestimating the actor’s mental states when judging someone for his action, and rely on what we suppose to be intuitive and em...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gvozdic, Katarina, Moutier, Sylvain, Dupoux, Emmanuel, Buon, Marine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797364/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27047402
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00190
_version_ 1782421942945447936
author Gvozdic, Katarina
Moutier, Sylvain
Dupoux, Emmanuel
Buon, Marine
author_facet Gvozdic, Katarina
Moutier, Sylvain
Dupoux, Emmanuel
Buon, Marine
author_sort Gvozdic, Katarina
collection PubMed
description Typically, adults give a primary role to the agent’s intention to harm when performing a moral judgment of accidental harm. By contrast, children often focus on outcomes, underestimating the actor’s mental states when judging someone for his action, and rely on what we suppose to be intuitive and emotional processes. The present study explored the processes involved in the development of the capacity to integrate agents’ intentions into their moral judgment of accidental harm in 5 to 8-year-old children. This was done by the use of different metacognitive trainings reinforcing different abilities involved in moral judgments (mentalising abilities, executive abilities, or no reinforcement), similar to a paradigm previously used in the field of deductive logic. Children’s moral judgments were gathered before and after the training with non-verbal cartoons depicting agents whose actions differed only based on their causal role or their intention to harm. We demonstrated that a metacognitive training could induce an important shift in children’s moral abilities, showing that only children who were explicitly instructed to “not focus too much” on the consequences of accidental harm, preferentially weighted the agents’ intentions in their moral judgments. Our findings confirm that children between the ages of 5 and 8 are sensitive to the intention of agents, however, at that age, this ability is insufficient in order to give a “mature” moral judgment. Our experiment is the first that suggests the critical role of inhibitory resources in processing accidental harm.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4797364
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47973642016-04-04 Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training Gvozdic, Katarina Moutier, Sylvain Dupoux, Emmanuel Buon, Marine Front Psychol Psychology Typically, adults give a primary role to the agent’s intention to harm when performing a moral judgment of accidental harm. By contrast, children often focus on outcomes, underestimating the actor’s mental states when judging someone for his action, and rely on what we suppose to be intuitive and emotional processes. The present study explored the processes involved in the development of the capacity to integrate agents’ intentions into their moral judgment of accidental harm in 5 to 8-year-old children. This was done by the use of different metacognitive trainings reinforcing different abilities involved in moral judgments (mentalising abilities, executive abilities, or no reinforcement), similar to a paradigm previously used in the field of deductive logic. Children’s moral judgments were gathered before and after the training with non-verbal cartoons depicting agents whose actions differed only based on their causal role or their intention to harm. We demonstrated that a metacognitive training could induce an important shift in children’s moral abilities, showing that only children who were explicitly instructed to “not focus too much” on the consequences of accidental harm, preferentially weighted the agents’ intentions in their moral judgments. Our findings confirm that children between the ages of 5 and 8 are sensitive to the intention of agents, however, at that age, this ability is insufficient in order to give a “mature” moral judgment. Our experiment is the first that suggests the critical role of inhibitory resources in processing accidental harm. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-03-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4797364/ /pubmed/27047402 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00190 Text en Copyright © 2016 Gvozdic, Moutier, Dupoux and Buon. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Gvozdic, Katarina
Moutier, Sylvain
Dupoux, Emmanuel
Buon, Marine
Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training
title Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training
title_full Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training
title_fullStr Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training
title_full_unstemmed Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training
title_short Priming Children’s Use of Intentions in Moral Judgement with Metacognitive Training
title_sort priming children’s use of intentions in moral judgement with metacognitive training
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797364/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27047402
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00190
work_keys_str_mv AT gvozdickatarina primingchildrensuseofintentionsinmoraljudgementwithmetacognitivetraining
AT moutiersylvain primingchildrensuseofintentionsinmoraljudgementwithmetacognitivetraining
AT dupouxemmanuel primingchildrensuseofintentionsinmoraljudgementwithmetacognitivetraining
AT buonmarine primingchildrensuseofintentionsinmoraljudgementwithmetacognitivetraining