Young Children's Theory of Mind Predicts More Sharing With Friends Over Time

The Role of Recipients' Inter-Group Relations and Routine Behaviors in the Development of Children's Sharing Behavior

Sharing with others is an important prosocial behavior, which is widely developed in early childhood. Numerous studies have demonstrated that single characteristics (routine behaviors or inter-group relations) of the recipient impact children's sharing behavior. However, there is still a lack of understanding of the factors that influence sharing decisions in children with dual characteristics. In Experiment 1, 112 children aged 4-6 years (Mage = 5.55, girls account for 50%) participated in a sticker-sharing task, and the results indicated that older children (aged 5 and 6 years) were more willing to share and shared more stickers. Additionally, children shared more stickers with recipients who exhibited good routine behaviors compared to those who had poor behaviors. In total, 134 children aged 4-6 years (Mage = 5.47, girls account for 50.1%) participated in Experiment 2. The results indicated that children share more stickers with a friend than with a stranger. When recipients possessed dual characteristics, they shared more stickers with a stranger who had good routine behaviors than with a friend who had poor ones. Therefore, children are selective in their sharing, and when confronted with a recipient with dual characteristics, children prioritize the recipient's prior performance of moral norms over interpersonal distance.

Sharing and Allocation in Preschool Children: The Roles of Theory of Mind, Anticipated Emotions, and Consequential Emotions

This study investigates the impact of theory of mind, anticipated emotions before actual behavior, and consequential emotions following the behavior on sharing and allocation behavior in 4-6-year-old children. In Experiment 1, 95 children were randomly assigned to three conditions (external emotion expectancy condition, internal emotion expectancy condition, and control condition) to explore the role of cognition and emotions in children's sharing and allocation behaviors. Experiment 2 employed a dictator game to further validate the influence of theory of mind and consequential emotions on behavior. The findings indicated that both anticipated and consequential emotions influence sharing behavior, but neither serves as a key predictor of allocation behavior. Theory of mind influences children's sharing behavior and is related to the fairness of allocation. Children with higher levels of theory of mind tend to rate consequential emotions more positively, while those with lower ratings of consequential emotions are more likely to reconsider sharing after reflection. Notably, theory of mind and emotional factors demonstrate distinct motivational effects on children's prosocial sharing and resource allocation, with negative emotions exhibiting a more pronounced impact on decision-making processes.

Investigating the effects of prenatal testosterone exposure (via 2D:4D) and socio-relational factors on 3-6-year-old preschoolers' prosocial choices

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Prosocial behavior such as helping and sharing develops early in childhood. Yet very few studies have investigated physiological and relational factors shaping prosociality among children. Here, we systematically examined the role of prenatal androgen exposure alongside prestige, dominance, and friendship in 3-6-year-old preschoolers' prosocial sharing with familiar peers.

METHODS

We tested a sample of 65 children, predominately of European descent. We used a cost-free direct-interaction prosocial choice task to assess children's prosocial tendencies. Second-to-fourth digit ratio (2D:4D) was used as a retrospective biomarker for prenatal androgen exposure. Prestige was measured through behavioral observations of interaction partners and visual regard, dominance through teacher questionnaires, and friendship via peer preference assessments.

RESULTS

We found that children acted prosocially when tested with a familiar peer. Children with lower 2D:4D (higher prenatal androgen exposure) behaved more prosocially. Further, there were marginal associations between the donors' prosocial tendencies and their visual regard as a proxy of their prestige (positive effect) and their teacher-rated dominance relative to the recipient (negative effect). Neither age, sex, nor friendship influenced prosocial choices.

CONCLUSIONS

Prenatal androgen exposure, approximated via 2D:4D, was associated with prosocial behavior. In contrast to previous research in older children, higher exposure was related to stronger prosocial tendencies, which corresponds to earlier findings on fairness in adults. Our findings point towards a potential role of sex steroids in the early development of children's social behavior, but they have to be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size of the current study. Nevertheless, they underscore the importance of integrating biological and psychological perspectives, while also highlighting the significance of studying the development of prosocial behavior within peer groups.

Children think differently from adults when reasoning about resources acquired from parents

Although sharing is often considered a virtuous behavior, individuals rarely share all their extra resources with those less fortunate. The current research investigated conditions under which children believe that someone who has more resources deserves to keep them rather than address an inequality. Specifically, we contrasted resources acquired via merit, windfall, and parental allocations. Across two studies, we showed 5- and 6-year-old children (n = 59), 8- and 9-year-old children (n = 120), and adults (n = 163) three scenarios in which one person acquired more resources than the other due to luck, due to merit, or because that person's parents gave him or her more, and we asked whether that person should share these resources or keep all of them. Results suggested that adults differentiated both the family resource and the merit conditions from the windfall allocation, believing that an agent deserves to keep the extra resources more when they are acquired through one's family or due to merit. However, children did not differentiate family resources from windfall, although they were more likely to believe that individuals deserve to keep their extra resources when they were acquired through merit. The type of the resource (i.e., money vs. balls) did not affect participants' sharing decisions. Overall, these findings suggest that over development the resources acquired from one's family come to be seen as more deserved than windfall resources.

Longitudinal development of children's sharing behaviour: Only children versus children with siblings from rural China

This study examined the development of children's sharing behaviour towards friends and strangers using dictator games with a longitudinal design in a sample of rural Chinese children (n = 589, 47.0% girls) at 3-4 years old and 2 years later (n = 453, 44.2% girls). Results showed that the willingness to share and the amount of sharing changed over time and were affected by family structure. Only children shared fewer stickers than non-only children at ages 3-4, but the amount they shared did not differ at ages 5-6. Only children may develop reciprocal friendships at an older age due to their lack of experience with siblings. Children shared more stickers with friends than strangers at ages 3-4, and such ingroup bias became stronger at ages 5-6.

Is Distributional Justice Equivalent to Prosocial Sharing in Children's Cognition?

Distribution and sharing are social preference behaviors supported and shaped by selection pressures, which express individuals' concern for the welfare of others. Distributive behavior results in distributive justice, which is at the core of moral justice. Sharing is a feature of the prosocial realm. The connotations of distribution and sharing are different, so the principles, research paradigms, and social functions of the two are also different. Three potential causes of confusion between the two in the current research on distribution and sharing are discussed. First, they share common factors in terms of individual cognition, situation, and social factors. Second, although they are conceptually different, prosocial sharing and distribution fairness sensitivity are mutually predictive in individual infants. Similarly, neural differences in preschoolers' perception of distribution fairness predict their subsequent sharing generosity. Finally, similar activation regions are relevant to distribution and sharing situations that need behavioral control on a neural basis.

Friendship is more than strategic reciprocity: Preschoolers' selective sharing with friends cannot be reduced to strategic concerns

The current study investigated whether children share especially much with their friends when sharing can be reciprocated (strategic sharing) or whether friendship and strategic reciprocity are independent factors in predicting children's sharing. If the former is the case, children should prefer their friend relatively more in a situation where the friend can reciprocate than in a situation without the possibility for reciprocity. In two experiments, 3- and 5-year-old participants (N = 270) could distribute stickers between themselves and three recipients: a friend, a child who would join the kindergarten group the next day, and a stranger. Half of the children were led to believe that their generosity could be reciprocated, and the other half were not. In Experiment 1, this was implemented by anonymous and nonanonymous sharing. In Experiment 2, the possibility of reciprocity or lack thereof was explicitly mentioned. The results show that participants across both age groups shared more resources with their friend than with less familiar recipients. Potential reciprocity affected 5-year-olds' sharing but not 3-year-olds' sharing-but only if reciprocity was explicitly mentioned (Experiment 2). Importantly, the preference for the friend was independent of the possibility to be reciprocated for all children. The current study shows that friendship and strategic reciprocity are relevant but probably largely independent factors for children's sharing. That is, the preference to share with friends cannot be reduced to strategic considerations.

"Who will share with me?": Preschoolers rely on their friends more than on their nonfriends to share with them

During the preschool years, children start to share selectively with close affiliates such as friends. However, it is unclear whether preschool children also selectively rely on their own friends more than on their nonfriends to share with them. Moreover, the developmental course of this relationship-dependent reliance is unknown. In the current study, therefore, we investigated to what extent preschoolers rely on their friends and nonfriends to share with them. To this end, we analyzed the choices of 82 3- to 5-year old children by means of a metacognitive opt-out paradigm. Children were led to believe that a friend and a disliked peer have had the opportunity-but have not been obligated-to share a highly valued resource with them by putting it in a box. Children could then choose between the above-mentioned box by their peer and an opt-out box that contained a slightly less attractive but certain item. Thus, children were expected to choose the peer's box only if they thought that their peer had shared with them. Otherwise, they should choose the opt-out option to maximize their outcome. Our results reveal developmental changes with older but not younger preschool children relying on their friends to share with them and relying more on their friends than on their nonfriends. This highlights the developmental changes in selective reliance over the preschool years and gives further insight into how young children learn to navigate the social world.

Autism does not Dictate Children's Lack of Sharing in a Prosocial Choice Test

Studies have examined the association between theory of mind (ToM) and prosocial behavior in children with mixed results. A handful of studies have examined prosocial sharing behavior in children with autism, who typically exhibit ToM deficits. Studies using resource allocation tasks have generally failed to find significant differences between the sharing behavior of children with autism and neurotypical children. We presented 18 neurotypical children and 33 children with autism with the Dictator Game. Children had the opportunity to allocate toys in recipient present and absent conditions. Both groups donated more items in the recipient present versus absent condition and chose the prosocial option at above chance levels. Children with autism behave as prosocially as neurotypical children do in this paradigm.

Validation of the ToMas-child Scale for the Assessment of the Theory of Mind in a Group of Spanish Speaking Children Aged 3 to 7 Years from Spain

This study aimed to determine the psychometric properties of the Theory of Mind assessment scale in children (ToMas-child). Two hundred and fifty-two Spanish children from 3 to 7 years were assessed in school settings. Rasch analysis showed the ToMas-child is a unidimensional scale valid for the assessment of the main components of the ToM in children. Data of hierarchical distribution of six items (seven tasks) are discussed as milestones in the latent construct of ToM development in childhood, and construct validity of the scale is examined. A reliability index of PSI = 0.7 indicated the usefulness of the scale as a screening tool.

Merit overrules theory of mind when young children share resources with others

Non-windfall approaches to sharing demonstrate pre-schoolers’ sensitivity to merit-based distributions of resources. However, such studies have not considered (1) whether epistemic aspects of task performance, such as the relative accuracy of a co-worker, influences pre-schoolers’ rates of sharing; and (2) how children’s emerging social understanding may impact resource allocations in high- and low-merit situations. These issues are of theoretical importance as they may provide new information about the scope of pre-schooler’s merit-based sharing behaviours. Moreover, as social understanding has been related to both increases and decreases in pre-schoolers’ levels of sharing, providing a merit-based assessment of this relationship would allow for a concurrent assessment of recent conflicting findings. In this study, three- and four-year-olds (N = 131) participated in an unexpected transfer task which was followed by a resource generation picture card naming task with a reliable or unreliable (high- or low-merit) co-worker (a hand puppet). The results showed that children engage in more generous rates of sharing with a high-merit co-worker. This suggests that merit-based sharing is apparent in young children and extends to epistemic aspects of task performance. However, such sharing was constrained by a self-serving bias. Finally, we were not able to detect an effect of children’s performance on the false belief task on sharing behaviours in the high- or low-merit trials, suggesting that these behaviours may not be modulated by social understanding during early childhood.

Not by the same token: A female orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) is selectively prosocial

Studies of prosocial behavior in nonhumans have focused on group-living social animals. Despite being highly social and closely related to humans, chimpanzees have rarely exhibited prosocial preferences in experimental tasks. Fewer studies have provided their non group-living relatives-orangutans-with the opportunity to express prosocial preferences. Here, we allowed a single female orangutan to provide rewards for herself and for her mother, sister, or both, across various phases, using a token economy task. The orangutan was more likely to choose prosocially when she could provide rewards to her sister and herself compared to when she could provide rewards to her mother and herself. However, when presented with the simultaneous options of providing rewards for self, self and mother, or self and sister, she chose prosocially equally often to her mother and sister. She made the largest number of prosocial choices in a phase when she could provide rewards to all participants (herself, her sister, and her mother) rather than providing rewards only to herself or only to herself and one other participant. Despite the obvious limitations of a single case study, the study adds to the limited information on prosocial preferences in less social primate species, particularly when given the chance to share food items with different kin.