Welcome to Gaia! ::


Interesting Fairy

15,340 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Athlete 50
  • Bunny Spotter 50
Toddlers can throw their fair share of tantrums, especially when you don't yield to their will. But by age 3, it turns out, the little rug rats actually have a burgeoning sense of fairness and are inclined to right a wrong.

When they see someone being mistreated, children as young as 3 years old will intervene on behalf of others nearly as often as for themselves, a study published this month in Current Biology suggests. Just don't ask them to punish the perpetrator.

Researchers in the U.K. and Germany morphed into puppeteers to learn when children develop their sense of justice and interest in punishment. The study included 137 children who were either 3 or 5 years old, and involve each, one at a time, in several different scenarios.

In one experiment, a devious puppet stole cookies that were originally intended for the child. In another, an innocent puppet cried out in distress when its marbles were snatched by a troublemaker puppet.

The researchers watched the kids' reactions.

It turned out that the children weren't just concerned about their own precious cookies or toys; they would jump in to assist the wronged puppets, too. Given the opportunity, 3-year-olds would intervene to return items a puppet had stolen to the original owner nearly 60 percent of the time. They would take back their own stolen items almost 80 percent of the time.

"The children were almost as concerned for the puppets as they were for themselves," says Keith Jensen, a psychologist at the University of Manchester who led the study.

The researchers also observed that the 3-year-olds did not seem eager to punish the bad puppets. When given only two options — to leave a stolen toy with a thief, or move it to a place where no one could have it — more than half the tots opted to leave the toy with the thief. Several of the kids were so uncomfortable with the idea of taking the toy away from the thief that they became distressed, and had to be removed from the study.

"It was so distressing that they just started crying," Jensen says. "They didn't seem to want to make [the puppets] suffer."

The 5-year-olds, on the other hand, weren't as hesitant to punish the bad guys. They opted to take the stolen cookies or marbles away from the thieves 70 percent of the time, even if that meant no one could enjoy them.

In that way, 5-year-olds are more like adults in their sensibility about punishment, Jensen says. Younger children, however, are more concerned about comforting the distraught victims than they are about disciplining the culprits.

And that's pretty surprising, says Peter Blake, a developmental psychologist at Boston University who was not involved in the study.

"They don't really punish." he says. "It seems like they really want to reset everything back to the way it was. It's really neat because no one has looked for that behavior in children before."

Jensen and his team believe the kids' reactions suggest that by age 3, they understand the concept of ownership — and feel empathy for those in distress. And because doling out punishment and taking away toys could cause distress and suffering, the toddlers may have tried to avoid it.

"On top of that," Jensen says, "children are taught to not take things from others. So they have to work against this rule." And that's not easy.

The notion that justice should sometimes be punitive, he says, comes at a later age, possibly out of the need to maintain fairness in society.

As an adult, when you see someone break a rule, you're more likely to punish them, Jensen says. "Because if cooperation was only used and not punishment, free riders would make fools of all of us."

But Jensen thinks his findings might be useful to parents and teachers of the very young. Since the youngest preschoolers tend to react against punishment and harm to others, he says, maybe we'd do well to teach them about justice by focusing on the victims rather than the culprits.



preschooler

Unbeatable Friend

17,040 Points
  • Invisibility 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Ultimate Player 200
Have you read the story where parents in some northern state are outraged at the school for teaching sex ed to kindergarten kids?

Kawaii Shoujo

The Dragon Maiden
Have you read the story where parents in some northern state are outraged at the school for teaching sex ed to kindergarten kids?
That reminds me of how a mother made sugar cookies for her daughter's class, the icing on them looked like a woman's privates, and the mother started to talk about it saying how all girls should be pleased at having such a thing.

Snuggly Buddy

29,150 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Mark Twain 100
  • Conventioneer 300
But Jensen thinks his findings might be useful to parents and teachers of the very young. Since the youngest preschoolers tend to react against punishment and harm to others, he says, maybe we'd do well to teach them about justice by focusing on the victims rather than the culprits.


This kind of sounds like they are advocating not disciplining the wrong doer because it might upset the other children.
That' practice would not end well. Young children need to be disciplined so they learn what is and isn't okay. Good parenting (or other authority actions) already should take into account the child's age and individual nature when deciding how to correct the child.
But if Johnny hits Sally and all of the "justice" is based on focusing on Sally then Johnny is just going to hit Billy or Suzy or ...
At some point the "justice" also needs to focus on the culprit.

Yuki_Windira's Husband

Invisible Hunter

13,800 Points
  • Perfect Attendance 400
  • Marathon 300
  • Forum Sophomore 300
Wonder what percentage of the time the children took the cookies from the bad puppets... and then kept them for themselves... >.>

Wintry Dragon

David2074
But Jensen thinks his findings might be useful to parents and teachers of the very young. Since the youngest preschoolers tend to react against punishment and harm to others, he says, maybe we'd do well to teach them about justice by focusing on the victims rather than the culprits.


This kind of sounds like they are advocating not disciplining the wrong doer because it might upset the other children.
That' practice would not end well. Young children need to be disciplined so they learn what is and isn't okay. Good parenting (or other authority actions) already should take into account the child's age and individual nature when deciding how to correct the child.
But if Johnny hits Sally and all of the "justice" is based on focusing on Sally then Johnny is just going to hit Billy or Suzy or ...
At some point the "justice" also needs to focus on the culprit.
Like treating the symptom rather than the disease?

Snuggly Buddy

29,150 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Mark Twain 100
  • Conventioneer 300
A mali
David2074
But Jensen thinks his findings might be useful to parents and teachers of the very young. Since the youngest preschoolers tend to react against punishment and harm to others, he says, maybe we'd do well to teach them about justice by focusing on the victims rather than the culprits.


This kind of sounds like they are advocating not disciplining the wrong doer because it might upset the other children.
That' practice would not end well. Young children need to be disciplined so they learn what is and isn't okay. Good parenting (or other authority actions) already should take into account the child's age and individual nature when deciding how to correct the child.
But if Johnny hits Sally and all of the "justice" is based on focusing on Sally then Johnny is just going to hit Billy or Suzy or ...
At some point the "justice" also needs to focus on the culprit.
Like treating the symptom rather than the disease?


Something like that.
When two children have a negative interaction (or a positive one for that manner) it is a potential learning experience for both of them. In the case of 'victim' / 'culprit' both can be taught the proper way to respond to those situations.
With little kids, in many cases both children involved are both victim and culprit. Just about any parent of young children has heard some variations of -
"She hit me!"
"Well he hit me first"
"That's because she took my (toy)!"
(and so on)

Teaching the victim that hitting back is not the best response is as important as teaching the culprit not to hit or take the toy. Sharing, kindness, blah blah...
David2074
But Jensen thinks his findings might be useful to parents and teachers of the very young. Since the youngest preschoolers tend to react against punishment and harm to others, he says, maybe we'd do well to teach them about justice by focusing on the victims rather than the culprits.


This kind of sounds like they are advocating not disciplining the wrong doer because it might upset the other children.
That' practice would not end well. Young children need to be disciplined so they learn what is and isn't okay. Good parenting (or other authority actions) already should take into account the child's age and individual nature when deciding how to correct the child.
But if Johnny hits Sally and all of the "justice" is based on focusing on Sally then Johnny is just going to hit Billy or Suzy or ...
At some point the "justice" also needs to focus on the culprit.
Part of focusing on the culprit though might be talking to said culprit and having them imagine how they would feel if they were the victim. I took the statement to mean more along the lines it is better to focus on the why something is bad, and build empathy around the one being effected, than focus on telling the culprit how bad they are. Empathy is what we ultimately want these kids to learn, not that they shouldn't do bad things because if they get caught they will be punished.

Snuggly Buddy

29,150 Points
  • Conversationalist 100
  • Mark Twain 100
  • Conventioneer 300
Krissim Klaw
David2074
But Jensen thinks his findings might be useful to parents and teachers of the very young. Since the youngest preschoolers tend to react against punishment and harm to others, he says, maybe we'd do well to teach them about justice by focusing on the victims rather than the culprits.


This kind of sounds like they are advocating not disciplining the wrong doer because it might upset the other children.
That' practice would not end well. Young children need to be disciplined so they learn what is and isn't okay. Good parenting (or other authority actions) already should take into account the child's age and individual nature when deciding how to correct the child.
But if Johnny hits Sally and all of the "justice" is based on focusing on Sally then Johnny is just going to hit Billy or Suzy or ...
At some point the "justice" also needs to focus on the culprit.
Part of focusing on the culprit though might be talking to said culprit and having them imagine how they would feel if they were the victim. I took the statement to mean more along the lines it is better to focus on the why something is bad, and build empathy around the one being effected, than focus on telling the culprit how bad they are. Empathy is what we ultimately want these kids to learn, not that they shouldn't do bad things because if they get caught they will be punished.


Well, that's a pleasant interpretation of the article and certainly a part of good parenting.
And it is always good to address the action as bad and not the "child is bad". (Though a couple of times I've wondered about the child - haha!)
Young children are often about the "me" and seldom take the time to think through the consequences of their actions beyond getting what they want. In part that is because doing so to any depth involves abstract logic and the human brain doesn't fully develop abstract logic until around ages 8-12.

But in the context of this particular article it sounded (to me anyway) like they were advocating not addressing even basic consequences for the culprit. For example the article said -

When given only two options — to leave a stolen toy with a thief, or move it to a place where no one could have it — more than half the tots opted to leave the toy with the thief. Several of the kids were so uncomfortable with the idea of taking the toy away from the thief that they became distressed, and had to be removed from the study.

So it sounded like they are saying if the misbehaving child steals a toy you should not even take the toy away from him/her because seeing the culprit get consequences might upset the other children. Instead focus on how sad Sally victim feels and maybe give her a different toy or something.

I do agree what you sad is better - and also widely in use in good parenting.
But the wording of this article might be used by some of the hard core free range parents as "proof" they should not discipline their children.

Sexy Goat

30,600 Points
  • Friend of the Goat 100
  • Invisibility 100
  • Perfect Attendance 400
This is interesting, but it does not apply to everyone (says the middle child scapegoat).

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum