What Factors Influence Prosociality in Young...

What Factors Influence Prosociality in Young Children?

Dr. Felix Warneken

Department of Psychology Harvard University

Cooperation in humans

Prosociality Collaboration

Prosociality

Cooperation in humans

Helping Sharing

!  Prosociality imposed by social environment? !  Development as internalization of social norms (Bar-Tal, 1982; Cialdini et al., 1982; Henrich et al., 2005)

!  Alternative: Predisposition to develop prosocial behaviors? (Hoffman, 2000)

!  Limitation: Research focused on adults & school-children (Dovidio et al., 2005; Eisenberg et al., 2006)

What are the origins of prosociality?

Hypothesis: Human socialization practices build upon a biological predisposition for altruism

Question: What are the origins of human prosociality in phylogeny and ontogeny?

Evidence: Experiments with young children: Psychological capacities for altruism in early ontogeny

Comparative studies with chimpanzees Shared vs. species-unique aspects

Research approach

1 2 3 4 5 Age 0

Early forms of

prosociality

!  Cultural norms !  Social-cognitive development

What are the origins of prosociality?

Helping behaviors in young children

Helping requires: (1) cognitive understanding of other's goal

(2) motivation to act on behalf of the other

individual goal

Helping

Helping in children: Clothespin task

Helping in children: Cabinet task

Warneken & Tomasello, 2006, Science Warneken & Tomasello, 2007, Infancy

Helping in young children

•  Social-cognitive skills –  Early emergence (14-18 months) –  Flexibility: Various goals & types of intervention

•  Motivation: Costs

Warneken & Tomasello, 2012, Infancy

Costly helping

Warneken et al., 2007, PLoS Biology Warneken & Tomasello, 2012, Infancy



•  Motivation: Costs –  Effort: Surmounting obstacles –  Opportunity: Disengaging from attractive activity

Warneken et al., 2007, PLoS Biology Warneken & Tomasello, 2012, Infancy

Warneken et al., 2007, PLoS Biology Warneken & Tomasello, 2008, Dev Psy




•  Motivation: Rewards –  Not necessary


Intrinsic motivation

*

p < .05 *

Trials with Helping in Subsequent Test Phase

"  Extrinsic rewards undermine intrinsic motivation

Warneken & Tomasello, 2008, Developmental Psychology





•  Motivation: Rewards –  Not necessary –  Rewards can undermine prosocial motivation


Reactive and proactive prosociality

Previous studies with young children Response to overt behavioral and facial cues

= Reactive prosociality " Can children help proactively?

Proactive helping

Conditions (between subject) Experimental Cans drop accidentally Control Cans discarded on purpose

Warneken, 2013, Cognition

Recipient during test:

•  No behavioral cues •  No request •  No solicitation

Proactive helping


"  Proactive helping emerges at around 25 months of age

Proactive helping


Warneken 2013, Cognition Warneken & Tomasello 2013, Infancy




•  Motivation: Rewards –  Not necessary –  Rewards can undermine prosocial motivation

•  Spontaneous, proactive helping –  Children help without concurrent behavioral cues –  Parental presence or encouragement unnecessary

Conclusion

Ontogeny

!  Children’s social-cognitive understanding of others’ goals and their altruistic motivation enable acts of helping

Phylogeny

!  Crucial aspects of human altruism in chimpanzees

!  Propensity to altruistically help others emerges in early childhood

!  Culture can facilitate these basic forms of altruism

1 2 3 4 5 Age 0

Early forms of

prosociality


Development of prosociality

The socialization of sharing

Resource sharing in adults

‘Dictator game’ as standard test of sharing

•  Anonymous, one shot •  No possibility for reciprocation or retaliation •  Adults share on average 30% of resource

Cross-cultural studies with adults

•  Variation in Dictator game offers •  Western, industrialized countries as outliers

" How do children acquire culture-typical behavior?

Henrich et al. 2005

Kahneman, Knetsch & Thaler, 1986; Engel 2010

Transmission of cultural norms

Social learning

•  Many culturally relevant behaviors are acquired through imitation

•  Parents are at the center of introducing children the cultural norms & practices

"  No experiments on the effect of parental modeling on resource sharing

Variability in socialization goals

Individualism Collectivism

Independence Interdependence

Autonomy Interpersonal relatedness

Be unique Belong, fit in

Realize internal attributes Engage in appropriate action

… …

e.g. Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Nisbett, 2003, Oyserman et al. 2002; Triandis, 1989

Collectivist culture

India •  Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh

Blake, Corbit, Callaghan, & Warneken, under review

Individualist culture

USA •  Boston


Method

Subjects USA N = 163 India N = 154

Age 3 to 8 years olds

Task Dictator game with candy

Design Between subject: Generous model (give 9, keep 1) Stingy model (give 1, keep 9) Control (no model)


US sample

* * *

"  No parental modeling effect in Generous condition "  Less sharing in Stingy condition

50%

Control Generous Stingy

India sample

Control

Generous

Stingy

India sample

*

*

*

*

Control

Generous

Stingy

"  Parental modeling effect in both conditions "  Effect emerges over age

India sample

50%

Control

Generous

Stingy

Hyper-generous donations

Giving more than half of resource

" US children ignore hyper-generous donations " Children from India show more faithful imitation

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

US India

% c

hild

ren

Control

Generous

Socialization of sharing behaviors

•  Faithful imitation is rare: Children’s own preferences prevail •  Children from India more influenced by parental modeling •  Effects of socialization emerge over development

1 2 3 4 5 Age 0

Early forms of

prosociality


Development of prosociality

Collaborators

Peter Blake Tara Callaghan John Corbit Michael Tomasello

Thank you

Funding

National Science Foundation John Templeton Foundation European Science Foundation Harvard Mind, Brain & Behavior

Warneken lab members

Thank you

Preliminary results

Non- carriers

7-repeat carriers

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

No model Non-generous model Generous model

Mea

n nu

mbe

r of s

ticke

rs d

onat

ed (0

to 6

)

"  7 repeat allele carriers more responsive to generous model

Control Generous model

Stingy model

Knafo, Blake & Warneken, in prep

Longitudinal study with N = 567 twin pairs (33% DRD4 7-repeat carriers)

Socialization of cooperative behaviors

Cross-cultural differences •  Children from India more influenced by parental modeling •  Effects of socialization emerge over development " Effects of socio-cultural environment

Individual differences •  DRD4 polymorphism: 7 repeat allele carriers are more

susceptible to environmental variables •  Genetic differences in receptivity to parental modeling "  Interaction of genes and environment

What elicits prosociality?

Actor Recipient

Proactive No behavioral cues

Reactive Behavioral cues indicate recipient's need

Interactive Communicative request directed at donor

Self-protective Harassment

What elicits prosocial behavior?

Agent Recipient

Proactive No behavioral cues

Reactive Behavioral cues indicate recipient's need

Interactive Communicative request directed at agent

Self-protective Harassment

Sharing and distributive justice

Study 2: Merit

Question Do children children share based upon merit?

Participants 3 and 5 year-olds (n = 18 per age)

Procedure Phase 1: Child and puppet play fishing game in parallel. Phase 2: Child distributes 6 stickers.

Conditions Success during fishing game Child/Puppet: 2/4 vs. 4/2 (within subject, counterbalanced)

Kanngiesser & Warneken, 2012, PLoS One

Study 2: Merit

Kanngiesser & Warneken, 2012, PLoS One

Warneken & Tomasello, 2006, Science Warneken et al., 2007, PLoS Biology Melis et al., 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society Yamamoto et al., 2009, PLoS One Yamamoto et al., 2012, PNAS

Type Goal of intervention

Comforting Negative emotional state # Providing emotional support

Sharing Lack of resource # Giving food or objects to person in need

Informing Lack of knowledge # Providing useful information to ignorant person

Instrumental helping Failed attempt #  Acting on behalf of person's unfulfilled goal

Warneken & Tomasello, 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences Warneken & Tomasello, 2009, British Journal of Psychology

Varieties of prosocial behavior

Trial

Reciprocity: Cooperators & Defectors

Partner:

Cooperate

Defect silent

Defect verbal

"  2.5-year-olds do not discriminate "  3.5-year-olds

-  More sharing with cooperators than defectors -  Intention matters: Least sharing when defector articulates intention

Warneken & Tomasello, in press

Parental modeling

Prosocial behaviors in humans

Helping Sharing

What Factors Influence Prosociality in Young...

Documents

Transcript of What Factors Influence Prosociality in Young...