Correlation Engine 2.0
Clear Search sequence regions


  • adult (6)
  • behavior (1)
  • child (2)
  • children (5)
  • female (3)
  • humans (1)
  • peer group (1)
  • punish (2)
  • research (1)
  • schools (1)
  • social (3)
  • Sizes of these terms reflect their relevance to your search.

    Past research has demonstrated that both consequentialist motives (such as deterrence) and deontological motives (such as "just deserts") underlie children's and adults' punitive behavior. But what motives do we ascribe to others who pursue punishment? The present work explores this question by assessing which punitive motives children (6- and 7-year-olds, n = 100; 67% White; 55% female) and adults (n = 100; 76% White; 35% female) attribute to individuals who witnessed and punished a transgression (third-party punishment). Beyond this, we varied the social role of the punisher (a teacher, an adult visiting a school, a fellow peer) to examine whether motivational ascriptions vary depending on social context. Across these contexts, children endorsed a variety of punishment motives but consistently rejected the notion that individuals punish for the purpose of inflicting suffering. Adults-like children-prioritized consequentialist motives but, in more personal contexts (involving a child punishing their peer), considered "just deserts" a more plausible motive. These findings speak to developmental and contextual variation in individuals' theories about punitive motives and provide insight into how individuals understand and respond to punishment in everyday life. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

    Citation

    Julia Marshall, Anton Gollwitzer, Paul Bloom. Why do children and adults think other people punish? Developmental psychology. 2022 Sep;58(9):1783-1792

    Expand section icon Mesh Tags


    PMID: 35511518

    View Full Text