Mothers (N = 256) of four different cultural groups judged the culpability of children whose actions were described in Piaget-type stories depicting commission of harm under various conditions. Child's age, harm to persons vs material objects, intentions, and amount of harm were systematically varied. All main effects (culture, intent of transgressor, age, and magnitude of harm) were significant, but several effects were qualified interactions. A cognitive social learning explanation is proposed to account for group differences in judgement, with special attention to cultural differences in values attached to harm to persons vs damage to property.