Perspective-taking and altruism.

Underwood, Bill; Moore, Bert S.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.91.1.143

Cited by 435 publications

(303 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

274

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to the positive results for selfcontrol, early work often failed to find the predicted association between prosociality and perspective taking ability in children younger than 4 years (Denham, 1986; Iannoti, 1985;Underwood & Moore, 1982). Although several recent studies report a positive association between cognitive perspective taking and prosociality for 4-to 6-year-olds (Farrant, Devine, Maybery & Fletcher, 2012;Takagishi, Kameshima, Schug, Koizumi, & Yamagishi, 2010;Moore, Barresi, & Thompson, 1998;Wu & Su, 2014), null and even negative results continue to be observed (Imuta et al, 2016).…”

Section: Research Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In each of these studies, the factors in Hoffman's (1975Hoffman's ( , 2000 model (social learning, self-consciousness, self-control, cognitive perspective taking) are considered in isolation, and their interaction is left an open question. It is possible that this atomistic approach may account for some of the null results observed for social learning (Eisenberg, Wolchik, Goldberg, & Engel, 1992;Warneken & Tomasello, 2008) and cognitive perspective 6 taking (Denham, 1986;Iannoti, 1985;Imuta et al, 2016;Underwood & Moore, 1982). A more holistic way to represent the functional interaction between the factors in Hoffman's (1975Hoffman's ( /2000 model is to consider the development of self-evaluative emotion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

You and me: Investigating the role of self-evaluative emotion in preschool prosociality

Ross

2017

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation for published version (APA): Ross, J. (2017). You and me: investigating the role of self-evaluative emotion in preschool prosociality. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 155, 67-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in Discovery Research Portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from Discovery Research Portal for the purpose of private study or research.• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain.• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal. Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 13. May. 2018Self-evaluative emotion and preschool prosociality AbstractSelf-evaluative emotions depend on internalized social standards and motivate social action. However, there is a lack of empirical research documenting the impact of self-evaluative emotion on 3-and 4-year-olds' prosociality. Extant research relates children's experiences of guilt to empathetic concern and making amends. However, the relationship between guilt and both concern and making amends is potentially reductive. Empathetic concern involves similar bodily expressions to guilt, and amend making is used to distinguish guilt from shame in children. This is the first study to relate the development of both positive and negative selfevaluative emotions to empathetic concern and prosocial choice (making amends, spontaneous help). Results confirm that the broad capacity for self-evaluative emotion is established in the preschool years, and relates to empathetic concern. Moreover, these social emotions can be used to predict prosocial choice. Making amends was best predicted by empathetic concern and by children's responses to achievement (pride following success, lack of shame following failure). Alongside moral pride, pride in response to achievement and resilience to shame was also the best predictor of spontaneous help. The data support the idea that young children's prosocial choices may be partially driven by the affective drive to maintain an 'ideal' self. Psychologists have emphasised that in order to be adaptive, selfevaluative emotion should be guilt rather than shame orientated. However, the adaptive role of pride has been neglected. We call on future research to redress the focus on negative selfevaluation in moral development and further explore the prosocial potential of pride. Research Highlights1. Self-evaluative emotions depend on internalized standards and motivate social action.2. Extant developmental research associates guilt with empathetic concern and reparation.3. The current paper shows th...

show abstract

Section: Research Highlightsmentioning

confidence: 98%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

You and me: Investigating the role of self-evaluative emotion in preschool prosociality

Ross

2017

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Socio-emotional intervention programs can also increase empathic tendencies. For example, empathy can increase when similarity between the self and others is emphasized (Barnett, 1984;Brehm, Fletcher, & West, 1981), after role-playing another person's feelings or situation (Barak, Engle, Katzir, & Fisher, 1987;Feshbach, 1984;Feshbach & Konrad, 2001;Underwood & Moore, 1982), after observing others' misfortunes (Barnett, Howard, Melton, & Dino, 1982;Perry, 1975), and after exposure to highly empathic role models (Bryan & Walbek, 1970;Kohn, 1991;Kremer & Dietzen, 1991;Perry, 1975).…”

Section: The Malleability Of Empathymentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Text Messages Make People Kinder?

Konrath¹

2015

Character

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Muitos estudos a definem como a capacidade do indivíduo asumir papéis sociais, bem como a habilidade de entender e inferir os sentimentos, as reações emocionais, os pensamentos, os motivos e as intenções dos outros. A tomada de perspectiva têm sido considerada pré-requisito para agir pró-socialmente (Barrett & Yarrow, 1977;Borke, 1975;Epstein, 1979;Hudson, Forman, & Brion-Meisels, 1982;Liben, 1978;Peterson, 1983;Radke-Yarrow, Zahn-Waxler, & Chapman, 1983;Rushton, Brainerd, & Pressley, 1983;Shantz, 1983;Underwood & Moore, 1982b).…”

Section: Considera Que a Moralidade "Será De Fato Universal Para Tounclassified

“…A avaliação do julgamento moral de sujeitos desonestos ou infratores alcançou apenas baixos níveis (Koller, 1988;Malinowski & Smith, 1985;Nelsen, Grinder, & Biaggio, 1969). De modo semelhante, crianças com níveis de julgamento moral mais altos manifestaram mais comportamentos de ajuda e de generosidade do que crianças com níveis mais baixos (Bar-Tal, 1982;Bristoti, 1985;Eisenberg, 1986;Underwood & Moore, 1982b).…”

Section: Considera Que a Moralidade "Será De Fato Universal Para Tounclassified

Desenvolvimento moral pró-social: Semelhanças e diferenças entre os modelos teóricos de Eisenberg e Kohlberg

Koller

Bernardes

1997

Estud. psicol. (Natal)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Prosocial moral development: similarities and differences between Eisenberg's and Kohlberg's theoretical models. This paper presents a critical review of the literature on pro-social moral development. Eisenberg's pro-social development model is presented and discussed in contrast to Kohlberg's theory. These models focus on complementary views in the study of morality. Whereas Kohlberg studied moral judgment using dilemmas involving transgressions, Eisenberg looks at pro-social actions, such as helping behavior. Psychological factors that might determine pro-social reasoning are also presented and discussed. Finally, recent research criticizing or corroborating either model is summarized.Desenvolvimento moral pró-social:Semelhanças e diferenças entre os modelos teóricos de Eisenberg e Kohlberg Sílvia Helena Koller Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Nara M. G. Bernardes Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do SulResumo: O presente artigo consiste em uma revisão crítica da literatura na área do desenvolvimento moral pró-social. O modelo teórico do desenvolvimento pró-social de Eisenberg é apresentado e discutido em comparação com o modelo teórico de julgamento moral de Kohlberg. Esses modelos apresentam enfoques complementares no estudo da moralidade. Enquanto Kohlberg estudava o julgamento moral a partir de transgressão, Eisenberg investiga a moralidade em funções de ações pró-sociais como comportamentos de ajuda. Os fatores psicológicos que podem ser concebidos como determinantes da pró-sociabilidade são também apresentados e discutidos. Finalmente, a pesquisa recente crítica ou corroboradora de ambos os modelos é sumarizada.

show abstract

Perspective-taking and altruism.

Cited by 435 publications

References 53 publications

You and me: Investigating the role of self-evaluative emotion in preschool prosociality

You and me: Investigating the role of self-evaluative emotion in preschool prosociality

Can Text Messages Make People Kinder?

Desenvolvimento moral pró-social: Semelhanças e diferenças entre os modelos teóricos de Eisenberg e Kohlberg

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About