Preschool Children’s Evaluations of Prototypic and Accidental Moral Transgressions Differ by Economic Strata

ABSTRACT

Research Findings: Research with older children and adults reliably demonstrates that individuals raised in poverty tend to evaluate concerns related to moral concerns (i.e., related to harm, welfare, and justice) differently than do wealthier individuals. However, little work has examined these patterns in young children. Children (N=214, Mage = 53.30 months, SD = 18.3 months) completed tasks regarding accidental and prototypic moral transgressions, and a standard verbal assessment. Parents reported family size and household income, which were used to compute individuals’ income-to-needs ratio (INR) compared to federal standards. Using generalized linear mixed modeling (GLMM), a repeated-measure analysis, results indicate that children in low-income families (INR < 2.0) were more lenient in how they evaluate both accidental and prototypic issues, compared to more affluent children. Moreover, they were more likely to evaluate issues based on communal welfare (e.g., equitable resource distribution), whereas more affluent children were more likely to reference psychological harm. Practice or Policy: Practitioners and researchers of early childhood should be cognizant and sensitive to differences in children’s social understanding. We encourage scholars to use a strength-based, adaptive approach in future research on children’s cognition, particularly involving SES, class, and the like.

Acknowledgements

We appreciate the work by our graduate and undergraduate research team for their work in data collection: Joshua Tripoly, Samantha Awada, Rena Onady, Michael Hostetter, Stephanie Silva, Rose Alicia Oliveras, Brandy Severino, Aaron Striano, Matilda Armstorng, Kiana Roundtree, Michelle Meyer, and Kristen Cocca. We are indebted to the children, families, teachers, and schools who participated in this project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.