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
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 12 | 31% |
Japan | 6 | 15% |
Germany | 3 | 8% |
United Kingdom | 3 | 8% |
Mexico | 2 | 5% |
Egypt | 2 | 5% |
Myanmar | 1 | 3% |
China | 1 | 3% |
Ireland | 1 | 3% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 8 | 21% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 27 | 69% |
Scientists | 6 | 15% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 13% |
Unknown | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
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% |