I scratched your back; should you not scratch mine? The expectation of reciprocity in 4- to 6-year-old children following a prosocial investment

Szarek, Katarzyna Myslinska; Tanaś, Łukasz

doi:10.1080/17405629.2021.1918095

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results showed that 3.5-year-olds were more likely to share if their peers had previously shared with them, but the partner's previous help did not affect their helping behavior. Similarly, Myslinska Szarek and Tanas (2022) found that preschoolers aged 4-6 years could understand and follow reciprocity norms, using it as a motivation for helping behavior. In their study, preschoolers were presented with a scenario where a protagonist had previously helped nonfriends and needed help themselves.…”

Section: Evidences From Studies On Human Early Childhoodsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Research on children has demonstrated that social interaction, in addition to physical contact and other rewards, plays a significant role in motivating their helping behavior. Reciprocity, a powerful social norm that stabilizes social relationships, also regulates children’s helping behavior ( Wörle and Paulus, 2019 ; Myslinska Szarek and Tanas, 2022 ). However, understanding reciprocity requires a certain level of cognitive ability.…”

Section: Why Help Others: Pursuing Social Contact or Other Rewardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why help others? Insights from rodent to human early childhood research

Chen

Han²,

Yin³

2023

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Helping behavior are actions aiming at assisting another individual in need or to relieve their distress. The occurrence of this behavior not only depends on automated physiological mechanisms, such as imitation or emotional contagion, that is, the individual’s emotion and physiological state matching with others, but also needs motivation to sustain. From a comparative and developmental perspective, we discover that the motivation for helping behavior has a deep foundation both phylogenetically and ontogenetically. For example, empathic concern for others, relieving personal distress and the desire for social contact are universal motivations across rodents, non-human primates and human early childhoods. Therefore, a circle-layered model integrating evidences for motivation for helping behavior from rodent to human early childhood research is proposed: the inner circle contains the emotional-behavioral system and the outer circle contains the affective-cognitive system. The application of this model has significance for both behavioral neuroscience research and cultivating prosocial behavior in human society.

show abstract

Section: Evidences From Studies On Human Early Childhoodsmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Why Help Others: Pursuing Social Contact or Other Rewardsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why help others? Insights from rodent to human early childhood research

Chen

Han²,

Yin³

2023

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, competitive participants tend to see others as behaving competitively, even when others are trying to cooperate (Kelley & Stahelski, 1970a), and participants who behave selfishly in economic games believe others will also behave selfishly (Aksoy & Weesie, 2012). Within‐subject effects also arise and occur even among young children, who after behaving generously, predict others will behave generously toward them (Leimgruber, 2018; Myslinska Szarek & Tanas, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Expectations are Primarily Rooted in Reciprocity: An Investigation of Fairness, Cooperation, and Trustworthiness

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social expectations guide people's evaluations of others’ behaviors, but the origins of these expectations remain unclear. It is traditionally thought that people's expectations depend on their past observations of others’ behavior, and people harshly judge atypical behavior. Here, we considered that social expectations are also influenced by a drive for reciprocity, and people evaluate others’ actions by reflecting on their own decisions. To compare these views, we performed four studies. Study 1 used an Ultimatum Game task where participants alternated Responder and Proposer roles. Modeling participants’ expectations suggested they evaluated the fairness of received offers via comparisons to their own offers. Study 2 replicated these findings and showed that observing selfish behavior (lowball offers) only promoted acceptance of selfishness if observers started acting selfishly themselves. Study 3 generalized the findings, demonstrating that they also arise in the Public Goods Game, emerge cross‐culturally, and apply to antisocial punishment whereby selfish players punish generosity. Finally, Study 4 introduced the Trust Game and showed that participants trusted players who reciprocated their behavior, even if it was selfish, as much as they trusted generous players. Overall, this research shows that social expectations and evaluations are rooted in drives for reciprocity. This carries theoretical implications, speaking to a parallel in the mechanisms driving both decision‐making and social evaluations, along with practical importance for understanding and promoting cooperation.

show abstract

Do Infants Expect Reciprocity Between Strangers?

Jin,

Ting,

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social scientists from different disciplines have long argued that direct reciprocity plays an important role in regulating social interactions between unrelated individuals. Here we examined whether 15-month-old infants (N = 160) would expect direct positive and negative reciprocity between strangers. In violation-of-expectation experiments, infants watched successive interactions between two strangers, agent1 and agent2. After agent1 acted positively toward agent2, infants were surprised if agent2 acted negatively toward agent1 in a new context. Similarly, after agent1 acted negatively toward agent2, infants were surprised if agent2 acted positively toward agent1 in a new context. Both responses were eliminated when agent2’s actions were not knowingly directed at agent1. Additional results indicated that infants viewed it as acceptable for agent2 to either respond in kind to agent1 or not engage with her further. By 15 months of age, infants thus already expect a modicum of reciprocity between strangers: Initial positive or negative actions are expected to set broad limits on reciprocal actions. This research adds weight to long-standing claims that direct reciprocity helps regulate interactions between unrelated individuals and, as such, is likely to depend on psychological systems that have evolved to support reciprocal reasoning and behavior.

show abstract

I scratched your back; should you not scratch mine? The expectation of reciprocity in 4- to 6-year-old children following a prosocial investment

Cited by 3 publications

References 39 publications

Why help others? Insights from rodent to human early childhood research

Why help others? Insights from rodent to human early childhood research

Social Expectations are Primarily Rooted in Reciprocity: An Investigation of Fairness, Cooperation, and Trustworthiness

Do Infants Expect Reciprocity Between Strangers?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About