‘She is looking at me! Shall I share?’ How Chinese and American preschoolers respond to eye gaze during sharing

Abstract

Previous research shows that the recipient's verbal communication about desires increases young children's sharing behavior. The current study examined how an adult partner's non-verbal communication through eye gaze influenced sharing behavior in children from different cultures. We presented one hundred forty-six 3-to 5-year-old American and Chinese children with a Dictator Game, in which they were asked to distribute resources between themselves and an experimenter. Children were randomly assigned to three conditions, in which the experimenter alternated her gaze between the child and the items that she wanted, or looked randomly around the room, or left when the child made decisions about sharing but claimed to come back later.Results showed that Chinese children shared more than American children did in the alternating-gaze condition, but not in the other two conditions; furthermore, the experimenter's alternating gaze influenced Chinese children to be more generous, but had no significant effect on American children. This suggests that compared to American children, Chinese children may be more compliant with others' requests communicated through a subtle cue of eye gaze. The study demonstrates important differences in sharing behaviors between American and Chinese preschoolers, and these differences are consistent with the cultural constructs of individualism and collectivism. K E Y W O R D S cross-cultural differences, eye gaze, non-verbal communication, preschooler, sharing behavior | I NTR OD U CTI ONA large body of evidence shows that people not only care about their own well-being, as assumed in classic economics, but they also show prosocial behavior that benefits others, such as helping, collaboration, comforting, and sharing (

Early Reputation Management: Three-Year-Old Children Are More Generous Following Exposure to Eyes

“…Our finding that 3-year-old children behaved more prosocially in response to eye cues is in line with previous research showing that children from a young age are able to detect and respond to social information from eye cues ( Farroni et al, 2002 ; Grossmann, 2017 ; Wu et al, 2018 ). This privileged attention and sensitivity to eyes is argued to allow infants and young children to detect the presence and some of the contents of other minds ( Grossmann, 2017 ).…”

“…Prior research suggests that 3-year-old children are better able to understand and identify what an image is meant to represent when the image is more iconic (i.e., it more closely resembles the actual object, such as a photograph), as compared to a less iconic (more abstract) image ( Callaghan, 2000 ). Children as young as 3 years also share more with a social partner who uses more naturalistic, communicative eye gaze cues (alternating gaze between children and an item of interest) compared to a partner who looks randomly around the room ( Wu et al, 2018 ). Therefore, it is plausible that children would benefit from the use of realistic images of eyes as opposed to stylistic images of eyes.…”

Empathy as a buffer: How empathy moderates the emotional effects on Preschoolers’ sharing

“…However, in the current study, children shared equally between the two puppet partners, which contradicts the argument that children just simply followed an equity norm. In fact, the aforementioned children’s sharing reasons revealed various motivations, as commonly seen in children tested with a dictator paradigm (Engel, 2011; Gummerum, Takezawa, & Keller, 2009; Rizzo & Killen, 2016; Wu, Chen, Gros‐Louis, & Su, 2018). Although we cannot exclude the possibility of children following equity or equality norms, they also show concerns for other’s welfare and affective preference, etc.…”

Golden gazes: Gaze direction and emotional context promote prosocial behavior by increasing attributions of empathy and perspective-taking.

“…Gaze direction—where people look during social interactions—is a nonverbal cue that has been associated with increased prosocial behavior. Partners in an economic game who are allowed to look at each other cooperate more than dyads of individuals who cannot establish a mutual gaze (Behrens et al, 2020) and children share more with others who occasionally look at them (Wu et al, 2018). In addition, individuals are more generous toward those whose gaze behavior (e.g., looking at a target cue) was helpful and reliable (Rogers et al, 2014).…”