No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Understanding the adult moralist requires first understanding the child scientist
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 October 2010
Abstract
Children learn from people and about people simultaneously; that is, children consider evidentiary qualities of human actions which cross traditional domain boundaries. We propose that Knobe's moral asymmetries are a natural consequence of this learning process: the way “child scientists” gather evidence for causation, intention, and morality through early social experiences.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010
References
Bigler, R. S. & Liben, L. S. (2007) Developmental intergroup theory: Explaining and reducing children's social stereotyping and prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological Science
16:162–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonawitz, E. B., Shafto, P., Gweon, H., Chang, I., Katz, S. & Schulz, L. (2009) The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Modeling the effect of pedagogical contexts on preschoolers' exploratory play. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-first Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. Taatgen, N.A. & van Rijn, H., pp. 1575–80. (Online publication only, no publisher).Google Scholar
Bullock, M., Gelman, R. & Baillargeon, R. (1982) The development of causal reasoning. In: The developmental psychology of time, ed. Friedman, W. J., pp. 209–54. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Carpenter, M., Akhtar, N. & Tomasello, M. (1998) Fourteen- to 18-month-old infants differentially imitate intentional and accidental actions. Infant Behavior and Development
21:315–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gopnik, A., Glymour, C., Sobel, D. M., Schulz, L. E., Kushnir, T. & Danks, D. (2004) A theory of causal learning in children: Causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychological Review
111:1–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gopnik, A., Sobel, D. M., Schulz, L. E. & Glymour, C. (2001) Causal learning mechanisms in very young children: Two-, three-, and four-year-olds infer causal relations from patterns of variation and covariation. Developmental Psychology
37(5):620–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hamlin, J. K., Wynn, K. & Bloom, P. (2007) Social evaluation by preverbal infants. Nature
450:557–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heyman, G. & Gelman, S. (2000) Beliefs about the origins of human psychological traits. Developmental Psychology
36(5):663–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kalish, C. (2002) Children's predictions of consistency in people's actions. Cognition
84(3):237–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kushnir, T., Wellman, H. M. & Gelman, S. A. (2007) The role of preschoolers' social understanding in evaluating the informativeness of causal interventions. Cognition
107(3):1084–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kushnir, T., Wellman, H. M. & Gelman, S. A. (2009) A self-agency bias in children's causal inferences. Developmental Psychology
45(2):597–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kushnir, T., Xu, F. & Wellman, H. M. (2010) Young children use statistical sampling to infer the preferences of others. Psychological Science
21:1134–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leslie, A. M. & Keeble, S. (1987) Do six-month-old infants perceive causality?
Cognition
25:265–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lutz, D. & Keil, F. (2002) Early understanding of the division of cognitive labor. Child Development
73:1073–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meltzoff, A. (1995) Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children. Developmental Psychology
31:838–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oakes, L. M. & Cohen, L. B. (1990) Infant perception of a causal event. Cognitive Development
5:193–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Repacholi, B. & Gopnik, A. (1997) Early reasoning about desires: Evidence from 14- and 18-month-olds. Developmental Psychology
33(1):12–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, M. & Gelman, S. A. (2008) Categories influence predictions about individual consistency. Child Development
79:1271–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, M., Gelman, S. A. & Brickman, D. (in press) Children's attention to sample composition in learning, teaching, and discovery. Developmental Science.Google Scholar
Saxe, R., Tzelnic, T. & Carey, S. (2007) Knowing who dunnit: Infants identify the causal agent in an unseen causal interaction. Developmental Psychology
43(1):149–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, L. E. & Bonawitz, E. B. (2007) Serious fun: Preschoolers engage in more exploratory play when evidence is confounded. Developmental Psychology
43(4):1045–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulz, L. E., Kushnir, T. & Gopnik, A. (2007) Learning from doing: Interventions and causal inference. In: Causal learning; Psychology, philosophy and computation, ed. Gopnik, A. & Schulz, L. E., pp. 67–86. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimizu, Y. A. & Johnson, S. C. (2004) Infants' attribution of a goal to a morphologically unfamiliar agent. Developmental Science
7(4):425–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shultz, T. R. (1982) Rules of causal attribution. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development
47, Serial No. 194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siever, E., Gopnik, A. & Goodman, N. (under review) Did she jump because she was brave or because the trampoline was safe? Causal inference and the development of social cognition.Google Scholar
Sobel, D. & Kirkham, N. (2006) Bayes nets and babies: Infants' developing statistical reasoning abilities and their representation of causal knowledge. Developmental Science
10(3):298–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelke, E., Phillips, A. & Woodward, A. (1995) Infants' knowledge of object motion and human action. In: Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate, pp. 44–78. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Turiel, E. (1983) The development of social knowledge: Morality and convention. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Woodward, A. (1998) Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor's reach. Cognition
69(1):1–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed