Conceptions of moral,social-conventional,and personal events among Chinese preschoolers in Hong Kong

Sixty-one Chinese preschoolers from Hong Kong at 2 ages (Ms = 4.36 and 6.00 years) were interviewed about familiar moral, social-conventional, and personal events. Children treated personal events as distinct from moral obligations and conventional regulations. Children judged the child as deciding personal issues, based on personal choice justifications, whereas children judged parents as deciding moral and conventional issues. With age, children granted increased decision-making power to the child. In contrast, children viewed moral transgressions as more serious, generalizably wrong, and wrong independent of authority than other events, based on welfare and fairness. Punishment-avoidance justifications for conventional events decreased with age, whereas conventional justifications increased. Young Chinese preschool children make increasingly differentiated judgments about their social world.     

Preschool Children's Judgments about Hypothetical and Actual Transgressions

Preschoolers' ( N = 112) judgments about hypothetical and actual moral and conventional transgressions were examined. Equal numbers of boys and girls at 2 ages (3 and 4 years old) either made judgments about 8 hypothetical moral and conventional transgressions or were interviewed on the same dimensions about 8 naturally occurring moral and conventional transgressions they witnessed in their preschools. Children judged both hypothetical and actual moral transgressions to be more serious, punishable, generalizably wrong, and independent of rules and authority than conventional transgressions. Regardless of domain, hypothetical transgressions were judged to be more wrong independent of rules than actual transgressions, and hypothetical (but not actual) moral transgressions were judged to be more independent of rules than conventional transgressions. 3-year-old girls judged the wrongness of actual moral transgressions to be more independent of authority than did 3-year-old boys. Similar findings were obtained when hypothetical and actual transgressions were matched, and domain differences were still obtained when individual items were examined. Findings are discussed in terms of previous research on preschoolers' conceptions of rules and transgressions.     

Being hurt and hurting others: children's narrative accounts and moral judgments of their own interpersonal conflicts

Children's narrative accounts and moral evaluations of their own interpersonal conflicts with peers were examined. Girls and boys (N = 112) in preschool (M= 4.8 years), first grade (M = 6.9 years), fifth grade (M = 10.9 years), and tenth grade (M = 16.2 years) provided one narrative of a time when they had been hurt by a peer ("victim"), and one of a time when they had hurt a peer ("perpetrator"). Victim and perpetrator narratives were equally long and detailed and depicted similar types of harmful behaviors, but differed significantly in terms of various measures of content and coherence. Narratives given from the victim's perspective featured a self-referential focus and a fairly coherent structure. When the same children gave accounts of situations in which they had been the perpetrators, their construals were less coherent and included multiple shifts between references to their own experience and the experience of the other. Children's moral judgments also varied by perspective, with the majority of victims making negative judgments and nearly half the perpetrators making positive or mixed judgments. These differences in moral judgments were related to the distinct ways in which victims and perpetrators construed conflict situations. Age differences were also found in both narrative construals and moral evaluations, but regardless of their age children construed conflict situations differently from the victim's and the perpetrator's perspectives. By integrating, within the study of moral development, children's interpretations of the social interactions that are at the basis of moral thinking, this approach brings us a step closer to conceptualizing the study of children's moral behavior.     

Children's judgements of psychological harm in normal and noncanonical situations

This study investigated children's (3-, 5-, and 7-year-olds) and adults' (total N = 92) integration of information about intentions, acts, and outcomes in moral judgments of psychological harm. Behavioral and emotional predictions and judgments of act acceptability and punishment were made under normal and noncanonical causal conditions. Participants at all ages judged it wrong to inflict negative psychological reactions of fear or embarrassment on unwilling participants, even when these reactions were idiosyncratic or noncanonical. When assigning punishment, younger children tended to use an outcome rule, whereas older participants were more likely to use an intention rule or a conjunction rule (if outcome is negative and intention is negative, then punish). The results show that children as young as 3 years are able to take into account other people's idiosyncratic perspectives when making moral judgments of psychological harm.     

Swiss Children's Moral and Psychological Judgments About Inclusion and Exclusion of Children With Disabilities

Children's judgments about inclusion and exclusion of children with disabilities were investigated in a Swiss sample of 6‐, 9‐, and 12‐year‐old children from inclusive and noninclusive classrooms (N = 422). Overall, the majority of children judged it as morally wrong to exclude children with disabilities. Yet, participants were less likely to expect the inclusion of children with mental or physical disabilities in academic and athletic contexts compared to social contexts. Moreover, older children more consistently coordinated disability type with context of exclusion. There were also significant differences depending on the type of classroom. The findings extend existing research on exclusion by investigating exclusion based on disability across different age groups and educational settings.     

Social judgments and emotion attributions about exclusion in Switzerland

Adolescents' social judgments and emotion attributions about exclusion in three contexts, nationality, gender, and personality, were measured in a sample of 12- and 15-year-old Swiss and non-Swiss adolescents (N = 247). Overall, adolescents judged exclusion based on nationality as less acceptable than exclusion based on gender or personality. Non-Swiss participants, however, who reflected newly immigrated children to Switzerland, viewed exclusion based on nationality as more wrong than did Swiss participants and attributed more positive emotions to the excluder than did Swiss participants. Girls viewed exclusion in nationality and personality contexts as less legitimate than did boys, and they attributed less positive emotions to excluder target in the nationality context than did boys. The findings extend existing research on exclusion by focusing on both emotion attributions as well as judgments and by investigating exclusion in a sample that included a recent immigrant group.     

古代小说中诚信观念与复仇主题的内在联系论略--以明代白话短篇小说"三言""二拍"为中心

在中国古代小说特别是通俗小说中，诚实、忠义、信义、信用等都作为作家歌颂的主题。同儒家提倡的仁心与佛家的自律精神相一致。但当诚信观念被践踏时，便会催生出复仇这一承栽着人类恩怨的情感历程。这是因为当诚实与信义被践踏、被背弃时，受到伤害的一方基于被愚弄的愤怒以及被伤害的仇恨而实行报复，背信弃义的受害者往往会变成复仇主体，这样诚信观念与复仇主体之间便产生了一种内在的联系。     

When Hurt Continues: Taking Conflict Personally Leads to Rumination,Residual Hurt and Negative Motivations Toward Someone Who Hurt Us

Individuals sometimes are hurt by the comments of others, and residual feelings of hurt are experienced after the episode. Because of individuals’ tendency to ruminate, we argue that residual hurt and its consequences may be especially common among individuals who tend to take conflict personally (TCP). We hypothesized that TCP would be positively related to motivations to avoid and to seek revenge against offenders, and these relationships will be mediated by the link between rumination and residual hurt. To test our hypotheses, we conducted a survey among undergraduates about how they reacted to a hurtful message. We confirmed our hypotheses.     

酷刑族诛与扩大化复仇的伦理逻辑——复仇主题中伦理之于复仇对等性和法律的僭越

魏晋时期后,复仇文学主题展示的复仇逻辑对法的僭越,变得日益突出起来。此种与扩大化复仇相联系的是复仇失当与错位。也说明在复仇作品的整体流向上,更多地吸收了六朝时代社会事件中的有关雪怨伸冤正义动机、激愤情绪导致的报复扩大化影响。族刑连坐,既反映了古代血族复仇的残余观念和野蛮习性,又延续扩展了这种观念习俗,其于复仇文学母题构成了一种"正反馈"关系。古人对此曾有反思和批评。     

When Children Treat Condemnation as a Signal: The Costs and Benefits of Condemnation

Condemnation is ubiquitous in the social world and adults treat condemnation as a costly signal. We explore when children begin to treat condemnation as a signal by presenting 4- to 9-year-old children (N = 435) with stories involving a condemner of stealing and a noncondemner. Children were asked to predict who would be more likely to steal as well as who should be punished more harshly for stealing. In five studies, we found that 7- to 9-year-old children treat condemnation as a signal—thinking that a condemner is less likely to steal and should be punished more harshly if caught hypocritically stealing later. We discuss the implications of these results for children’s emerging understanding of signaling and moral condemnation.     

Bullying and repeated conventional transgressions in Swedish schools: How do gender and bullying roles affect students’ conceptions?

Bullying is a moral transgression. Recognizing the importance of approaching bullying from a moral perspective, the present study examines whether children's judgments and reasoning to justify their judgments differ between bullying and repeated conventional transgressions. Our study also explores differences by gender and differences among bullies, victims, and uninvolved students. Participants included 381 students from 13 elementary schools in Sweden. Findings indicate that children judge bullying as more wrong than repeated conventional transgressions; use moral reasons more frequently in their justifications about bullying than about repeated conventional transgressions; and use conventional reasons more frequently to justify their judgments on repeated conventional transgressions as compared with bullying. Female students and nonbullies judged bullying and repeated conventional transgressions as more wrong and used moral reasons more frequently in their justifications of judgments of bullying than did male students and bullies. Male students reported bullying more than did female students. Implications for practice are also discussed.     

How children and adolescents evaluate gender and racial exclusion

Children's and adolescents' social reasoning about exclusion was assessed in three different social contexts. Participants (N = 294) at three ages, 10 years (4th grade), 13.7 years (7th grade), and 16.2 years (10th grade), fairly evenly divided by gender, from four ethnic groups, European-American (n = 109), African-American (n = 96), and a combined sample of Asian-American and Latin-American participants (n = 89) were interviewed regarding their social reasoning about exclusion based on group membership, gender, and race. The contexts for exclusion were friendship, peer, and school. Significant patterns of reasoning about exclusion were found for the context, the target (gender or race) of exclusion, and the degree to which social influence, authority expectations, and cultural norms explained children's judgments. There were also significant differences depending on the gender, age, and ethnicity of the participants. The findings support our theoretical proposal that exclusion is a multifaceted phenomenon and that different forms of reasoning are brought to bear on the issue. This model was drawn from social-cognitive domain theory, social psychological theories of stereotype knowledge and intergroup relationships, and developmental studies on peer relationships. The results contribute to an understanding of the factors involved in the developmental emergence of judgments about exclusion based on group membership as well as to the phenomena of prejudice, discrimination, and the fair treatment of others.     

The Role of Agent and Social Context in Judgments of Freedom of Speech and Religion

This study examined children's, adolescents', and college students' judgments of the rights of child and adult agents to freedom of speech and religion in 3 social contexts: the general level of society, the school, and the family. Two hundred forty participants, evenly divided into 5 grade levels (mean ages 6,6, 8,5,10,6,12,4, and 22,7) made judgments of the legitimacy of authority prohibition, rule evaluation, generalizability, and rule violation for all freedom/social context/agent combinations. Concepts of freedom of speech and religion were found to emerge in the early elementary school years, and endorsements of freedoms were increasingly affected by social context and agent with age. College students were less likely than any other age group to affirm children's freedom of religion in the family context. Considerations of the mental competence and maturity of agents and the potential for harm to ensue from acting on freedoms played an important part in the decisions of older, but not younger, participants.     

盗窃电能犯罪数额认定的思考

盗窃电能犯罪属于盗窃罪,是不纯正数额犯,盗窃电能数额在定罪和量刑中都具有至关重要的作用,准确认定盗窃电能数额是正确定罪量刑的基础。通过对实践中盗窃电能犯罪数额认定的现状可知,刑事法律应按照客观真实原则、公平公正原则、存疑有利被告人原则确定盗窃电能犯罪数额的认定方法,以利于司法操作。     

Children's obligatory and discretionary moral judgments.

This study examined children's obligatory moral judgments (which reflect a moral requirement) and discretionary moral judgments (which reflect moral worthiness, but not a requirement). 72 children participated across grades 2, 5, and 8 (mean ages, 8-3, 11-0, and 13-11). Children were interviewed in response to stimulus stories that controlled for the degree of agent's cost (low and high) for performing positive moral acts (giving money for food to an impoverished, hungry person) and negative moral acts (not stealing money for food). Results showed that negative moral acts were more often conceived as obligatory than positive moral acts. In addition, the results support the proposition that children's concepts of obligation underlie judgments to codify law, that justice reasoning builds on concepts of welfare, and that with increasing age discretionary moral reasoning incorporates such character traits as benevolence, sacrifice, and supererogation. Discussion includes consideration of how the study's conceptualization and analysis can provide guidance to a moral-developmental research program.     

Reasoning About the Scope of Religious Norms: Evidence From Hindu and Muslim Children in India

Conflicts arise when members of one religion apply their norms to members of another religion. Two studies explored how one hundred 9- to 15-year-old Hindu and Muslim children from India reason about the scope of religious norms. Both Hindus and Muslims from a diverse Hindu–Muslim school (Study 1) and Hindus from a homogeneous Hindu school (Study 2) more often judged it wrong for Hindus to violate Hindu norms, compared to Muslim norms, and said the opposite for Muslims. In contrast, children judged it wrong for both Hindus and Muslims to harm others. Thus, even in a setting marred by religious conflict, children can restrict the scope of a religion's norms to members of that religion, providing a basis for peaceful coexistence.     

民风民俗与直隶义和团运动的兴起

:鸦片战争后 ,外国教会势力对民风民俗的广泛冲击和破坏 ,极大地伤害了中国人民的民族感情 ,也埋下了中国人民复仇的种子。直隶东南尤其是威县的“民风强悍”“民强好勇” ,使这颗种子生根、开花、结果。两者的结合 ,正是直隶义和团运动兴起不可忽视的社会条件 ,可惜的是 ,对这个条件的研究还远远不够     

Children's Reasoning about Interpersonal and Moral Conflicts

2 studies were conducted to determine if children make judgments about both justice and interpersonal relations in conflictful situations. In Study 1, 48 subjects (24 males and 24 females) in the third, sixth, and ninth grades (mean ages = 8.40, 11.38, 14.38 years) were administered 2 stories entailing conflicts between justice and interpersonal concerns. Children judged and justified acts in 4 conditions systematically varying interpersonal and justice concerns. Children generally gave priority to justice and rights over friendship, based primarily on considerations of welfare or rights. In Study 2, 76 subjects (39 males and 37 females) in the third, sixth, and ninth grades (mean ages = 9.08, 12.10, 14.92 years) were presented with 3 stories entailing conflicts between justice and interpersonal relations. Subjects gave greater priority to interpersonal considerations in Study 2 than in Study 1, and their evaluations varied according to the salience of the different concerns. In both studies, few gender differences were obtained. The results demonstrate that across development, concerns with justice and interpersonal relationships coexist in judgments of male and female children, and that the ways they are applied depend on the situation.     

Mothers' and Children's Conceptualizations of Corporal Punishment

Preschool ( M age = 4–11) and fifth-grade ( M age = 12–1) children and their mothers judged the acceptability of corporal punishment as a function of the type of transgression (dangerous, violation of social rule, or violation of moral precept) and discipline agent. Children of both ages and their mothers discriminated among different types of transgressions as a function of rule contingency, rule generalizability, and seriousness of the transgression. Social convention transgressions were judged to be more rule contingent, less generalizable (across settings), and less serious than prudential (dangerous) or moral violations, but overall children judged transgressions to be more generalizable than did their mothers. Preschool children showed broad acceptability for severe corporal punishment given any type of transgression, by any agent, whereas fifth graders were generally discriminating about limits of punishability, and their judgments appeared to be transitional between the broad acceptance shown by younger children and more focused acceptability shown by mothers. Mothers were proprietary with respect to agent and tended to focus on dangerous and moral violations as punishable. Findings suggest a developmental path from a single criterion for young children to consideration of multiple criteria for older children and adults. Judgments were also interpreted as reflecting social roles such as parents' responsibility to constrain children and children's expectations for constraint. Preschool children's broad acceptability of punishment despite their differentiation of classes of rules and of transgressions suggests that different constraints operate for judgments about rules or commands as opposed to sanctions. Implications for children's ability to identify and report abuse are also noted.