Do 15-month-old infants prefer helpers? A replication of Hamlin
            <i>et al</i>
            . (2007)

Schlingloff, Laura; Csibra, Gergely; Tatone, Denis

doi:10.1098/rsos.191795

Cited by 80 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Neither Cowell and Decety (2015) nor Schlingloff et al. (2020) found a preference for the helper over the hinderer in infants who had seen the hill paradigm, with half of the sample reaching for the prosocial character, while the other half reached for the antisocial character in both studies. Geraci and Surian (2011), using the allocating goods paradigm, reported mixed evidence, with a prosocial preference in 16 month olds but not in 10 month olds.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toddlers' preference for prosocial versus antisocial agents: No associations with empathy or attachment security

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research has indicated that the majority of infants and toddlers prefer prosocial to antisocial agents, but little research has examined interindividual differences in children's preference. This study examined whether 24‐month‐olds' (n = 107) sociomoral preference was associated with attachment security or empathy, assessed with the Attachment Q‐Sort and the Empathy Questionnaire. Toddlers were presented with a puppet play, in which a protagonist tried to open a box and was helped by a prosocial agent and hindered by an antisocial agent. Then, toddlers were asked to pick up either the prosocial or the antisocial agent (manual choice), as a measure of their sociomoral preference. Of the 107 toddlers included in this study, 60.7% chose the prosocial over the antisocial agent. Neither empathy nor parent‐child attachment was associated with children's preference. Our findings indicate a slight overall preference for the prosocial agent, but with notable interindividual differences not explained by empathy or attachment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toddlers' preference for prosocial versus antisocial agents: No associations with empathy or attachment security

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Empirical evidence suggests infants identify helpful behavior in this way. The majority of studies find that infants prefer individuals who are helpful to those who hinder others' goals (Hamlin, et al, 2007;Margoni & Surian, 2018;Woo & Spelke, 2020a; though see Salvadori et al, 2015;Schlingloff, et al, 2020). This preference extends to those who intend to be helpful, even if they are not successful (Hamlin, 2013b).…”

Section: The Calculus Of Prosocial Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One prediction based on this developmental trajectory is that social preferences based on third party observations (at least in the absence of participants' own sympathetic motives) ought to be weaker in individuals with stronger priors on parochial behavior and, as a result, ought to diminish at the group level with age. Cross-cultural differences in expectations of parochialism could also help to explain conflicting results in studies of third party preferences for prosocial agents, perhaps even in infancy (Salvadori et al, 2015;Schlingloff et al, 2020).…”

Section: Inferences Of Universal Affiliation and Preferences For Fairmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adopted utility calculus: Origins of a concept of social affiliation

Lj¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To successfully navigate their social world, humans need to understand and map enduring relationships between people: we need a concept of social affiliation. Here I propose that our initial concept of social affiliation, available to human infants, is based on the extent to which one individual consistently takes on the goals and needs of another. This proposal grounds affiliation in a commonsense psychology that treats individuals as rational actors, as formalized in the naive utility calculus model. A concept of affiliation based on interpersonal utility adoption can account for findings from studies of infants’ reasoning about imitation and similarity, helpful and fair individuals, “ritual” behaviors, and social groups, without the need for additional innate mechanisms such as a coalitional psychology, moral sense, or general social preference for similar others. This concept of affiliation also offers a new view on the prosocial nature of imitation, placing the value of aligning with someone else’s behavior in the adoption of their goals rather than in mere similarity. I propose further tests of this concept of affiliation, and also discuss how it is likely to be relevant to reasoning and learning about social relationships across the lifespan.

show abstract

“…Children start to manage their own reputation -and to evaluate the reputations of others -in early childhood (189)(190)(191). The ability to form impressions of others seems to emerge earlier in development than the ability to manage one's own reputation: indeed, some studies have even found that pre-verbal infants evaluate others on the basis of helpfulness (197,198) (but see (199,200) for failed replications). Whether or not the ability to evaluate others emerges in preverbal infants, this ability does seem to be reliably evident by early childhood.…”

Section: The Cognitive Underpinnings Of Managing and Evaluating Reputmentioning

confidence: 99%

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: the social costs of prosocial behaviour

Raihani¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Performing costly helpful behaviours can allow individuals to improve their reputation. Those who gain a good reputation are often preferred as interaction partners and are consequently better able to access support through cooperative relationships with others. But investing in prosocial displays can sometimes yield social costs: excessively generous individuals risk losing their good reputation, and even being vilified, ostracised or antisocially punished. As a consequence, people frequently try to downplay their prosocial actions or hide them from others. In this review, we explore when and why investments in prosocial behaviour are likely to yield social costs. We propose two key features of interactions that make it more likely that generous individuals will incur social costs when: (i) observers infer that helpful behaviour is motivated by strategic or selfish motives; and (ii) observers infer that helpful behaviour is detrimental to them. We describe how the cognition required to consider ulterior motives emerges over development and how these tendencies vary across cultures – and discuss how the potential for helpful actions to result in social costs might place boundaries on prosocial behaviour as well as limiting the contexts in which it might occur. We end by outlining the key avenues and priorities for future research.

show abstract

Do 15-month-old infants prefer helpers? A replication of Hamlin et al . (2007)

Cited by 80 publications

References 30 publications

Toddlers' preference for prosocial versus antisocial agents: No associations with empathy or attachment security

Toddlers' preference for prosocial versus antisocial agents: No associations with empathy or attachment security

Adopted utility calculus: Origins of a concept of social affiliation

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: the social costs of prosocial behaviour

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About