Nelson – Young Children’s Use of Motives and Outcomes as Models

Good motive (positive intention): This boy was playing with a ball; his friend did not have anything to play with. He wanted to throw the ball to his friend so they could play catch together with the ball. Bad motive (negative intention): This boy was playing with a ball; he was very mad at his friend that day. He wanted to throw the ball at his friend so he could hit him on purpose.\" No marks for 'motive implicit/motive explicit' as it is a different IV.

It implies the ability to distinguish right from wrong, act on this distinction, and experience pride in virtuous act and shame and guilt over acts that violates one's moral standards

• To demonstrate that the children as 3 yrs old use motives and outcomes as relevant criteria for moral judgments

• Children as young as 3 yrs old use both motive and outcome in making moral judgments if the mode of presentation makes these moral criteria as salient and keeps them available at the time of judgment • When motive and outcome have opposite valances, children tend to recall the story so as to make them congruent

• 60 preschool children: Age range 3-4 yrs, equal girls and boys • 30 second grade children: Age range 6-8 yrs, equal girls and boys • From white, middle class, urban area • Parental consent

• 4 versions of a story • Factorial design: 2 levels of motive and 2 levels of outcome • Each child heard all four versions of the story • Each child in one condition (Independent Measures Design • Repeated measures design within independent measures design +motive +outcome +motive -outcome -motive +outcome -motive -outcome

• Story condition • Motive (good/ bad) • Outcome (good/bad) • Type of story presentation (verbal/ explicit pic / implicit pic)

• Rating of character face out of seven

• 2 sets of black and white line drawings • Each set contained drawings illustrating the motive, behavior, and outcome in each story • First set: Motives are implied by facial expressions (Implied) • Second set: Motives are conveyed explicitly by presenting thought bubbles (Explicit)

• After viewing the presentation, they were asked how good or bad the little boy was by pointing to a scale of faces from 1-7, 1 being very bad, 7 being very good • After the judgment, drawings were removed • Children were asked to tell the story aloud- checking for errors of valence

• Motive is a more decisive factor in moral judgments than outcome

Motive made little difference Outcome had greater effect on moral judgment in explicit motive condition Outcome info was used more in bad motive stories in the two picture condition than verbal only

3 yr old children made more errors than 7 yr old children More recall errors in motive than outcome Fewer recall errors in picture presentations

• 27 preschool boys and girls • Mean age 3.8 yrs • Same material, in all stories outcome preceded motive

to see if order presentation affected results

• Children made more recall errors when cues were inconsistent • Judgments in verbal condition were less affected by motive than picture conditions

-A strength with the Nelson study on children's morals is high ecological validity. This is due to the fact that the children were read ecologically sound stories-this is an activity that the children would do in their \"natural\" environment.

-One weakness with the Nelson study on children's' morals is that the results are not generalizable. There is a racial bias-all the the preschoolers were white from middle class families.