Children's distributive justice reasoning: A standardized and objective scale.

Abstract

A paired-comparisons measure of distributive justice development (DJS) was developed and validated in three studies. In Study 1 104 children from kindergarten and second and fourth grades were given the DJS and two Piagetian logical reasoning tasks. Age trends and a relation with logical reasoning were found. In Study 2 66 children from first, third, and fifth grades were given the DJS and a measure of verbal ability. Age trends and a low relation with verbal ability were found. In Study 3 88 first, third, and fifth grade children from Kinshasa, Africa, were given the DJS. The trends replicated those found in Study 2. Implications for distributive justice research are drawn.The development of moral judgment in children has been a popular area for researchers since Piaget's (1932) and Kohlberg's (1958) pioneering efforts in this area. Recently Damon (1975) has narrowed the broadly defined area of moral judgment to assess children's understanding of distributive justice, or the fair allocation of goods in a group or society. Such a domain is important to study, since this form of reasoning is part of everyday life, not only in childhood but throughout one's life. People are faced far more often with distributive decisions-such as giving and receiving allowances, giving to charities, reinforcing others' behavior-than with such Kohlbergian justice decisions as saving a life through theft of an exorbitantly priced drug.

Children’s understanding of market forces

“…Altruism, therefore, can increase with age, in line with a realization of the consequences of oneÕs actions (Piaget, 1932(Piaget, /1977Keil, 1986). Damon (1975Damon ( , 1980) described a series of stages of ''positive justice'' understanding spanning the ages from 4 to 9 and beyond, and his views were subsequently supported by others (Enright, Franklin, & Manheim, 1980;McGillicuddy-De Lisi, Watkins, & Vinchur, 1994). In the present study, we are not concerned with the ethical level of the children, but in their ability to differentiate between moral and economic considerations, and to focus selectively on economic mechanisms when asked.…”

Hong Kong Children's Concept of Distributive Justice

“…Previous research has shown that kindergarten children view allocations based on age entitlement as more fair than do older children (for example, Damon, 1977;McGillcuddy-De Lisi et al, 1994). But the effects of the age of the recipients on young children were interpreted often as children's tendency to justify fairness on the basis of external, observable realities, and were judged as an irrelevant basis for allocating resources (Damon, 1977;Enright et al, 1980). The results of this study provided more information about the effects of the age of recipients on children's concept of distributive justice.…”

“…Damon (1975Damon ( , 1977Damon ( , 1980) developed a cognitive-developmental method of positive justice reasoning and incorporated this developmental progression. This model was supported by other studies (for example, Enright, Enright and Lapsley, 1981;Enright, Franklin and Manheim, 1980;Enright et al, 1984). But these studies have only focused on specific kinds of merits of the recipients (e.g., being productive), without considering other types of merits that may affect children's decisions.…”

Adolescent–adult interactions and culture in the ultimatum game

“…This theory provides an explanation of the experimental results discussed above. Support for this theory was provided by Enright et al (1984) and Enright et al (1980) for American, School Grade Offer (% of stake offered to responder) Murnighan and Saxon (1998) Harbaugh et al (2003) current study Fig. 2.…”