↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Social Evaluation or Simple Association? Simple Associations May Explain Moral Reasoning in Infants

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
39 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
105 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
231 Mendeley
Title
Social Evaluation or Simple Association? Simple Associations May Explain Moral Reasoning in Infants
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0042698
Pubmed ID
Authors

Damian Scarf, Kana Imuta, Michael Colombo, Harlene Hayne

Abstract

Are we born amoral or do we come into this world with a rudimentary moral compass? Hamlin and colleagues argue that at least one component of our moral system, the ability to evaluate other individuals as good or bad, is present from an early age. In their study, 6- and 10-month-old infants watched two social interactions - in one, infants observed the helper assist the climber achieve the goal of ascending a hill, while in the other, infants observed the hinderer prevent the climber from ascending the hill. When given a choice, the vast majority of infants picked the helper over the hinderer, suggesting that infants evaluated the helper as good and the hinderer as bad. Hamlin and colleagues concluded that the ability to evaluate individuals based on social interaction is innate. Here, we provide evidence that their findings reflect simple associations rather than social evaluations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 3%
Hungary 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 218 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 23%
Student > Bachelor 51 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 10%
Student > Master 21 9%
Researcher 11 5%
Other 46 20%
Unknown 27 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 161 70%
Social Sciences 10 4%
Philosophy 7 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 1%
Other 10 4%
Unknown 33 14%