Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Scholarly Works (21 results)

  • Article
  • Peer Reviewed
Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Volume 45 (2023)
Prior research documents that adults in Western cultures perceive others as more susceptible to social influence than themselves (Pronin et al., 2007). Study 1 (N = 318) investigated the cultural generalizability of this asymmetric perception effect by examining young adults in South Korea where conformity is relatively valued, and a comparison sample of young adults in the United States. The results documented that the self-other distinction was just as strong in South Korea as it was in the United States. Study 2 (N = 102) examined the development of this tendency among 6- to 12-year-old South Korean children and showed that this asymmetry increasingly emerges with age. These findings suggest that asymmetric perceptions of conformity are robust and emerge over the course of development.
    Cover page: The Self-Other Distinction in Perceptions of Social Influence: Evidence of Cultural Generalizability and Childhood EmergenceCreative Commons 'BY' version 4.0 license
    • Article
    • Peer Reviewed
    Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Volume 36 (2014)
      Cover page: Magical Thinking: Outcome Bias Affects Children's Evaluation of Testimony
      • Article
      • Peer Reviewed
      Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (2023)
      Children often need to rely on other peopleÕs testimony to figure out what happened. One challenge in learning from others is that people can disagree in their interpretations of what happened. The present research examined how children ages 7 to 11 use disagreement to make inferences about past social events. Specifically, when there is no reason to question the reliability of either informant, can children use disagreement to infer that an ambiguous social event occurred? Experiment 1 (N = 52) found that children are indeed more likely to infer that an ambiguous social event occurred after learning that people disagreed (versus agreed) about what happened and that this ability strengthens with age. Experiment 2 (n = 43; data collection ongoing) examines how children make this inference. We predict that childrenÕs ability to reason about what would cause disagreement is critical to make inferences from disagreement about what happened.
        Cover page: Children use disagreement to infer what happened
        • Article
        • Peer Reviewed
        Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Volume 44 (2022)
        To figure out what happened in the past, we often rely on others’ testimony. One challenge is that people can disagree in their interpretations of what happened. We will investigate children’s use of disagreement as evidence for what happened, specifically, inferring that the event itself was ambiguous and could generate multiple interpretations. Children (N = 50; 7 to 11 years) will hear two observers’ testimony, in which the observers either agreed about another speaker’s desires (e.g., both observers agreed that the speaker wanted an intervention) or disagreed (one observer was sure the speaker wanted the intervention, while the other observer was sure the speaker did not want it). Children will then be asked to infer which of three events happened: the speaker uttered an unambiguous request (should be inferred more in agreement trials), an ambiguous request (should be inferred more in disagreement trials), or a random statement (neither trial type).
          Cover page: Inferences from DisagreementCreative Commons 'BY' version 4.0 license
          • Thesis
          • Peer Reviewed
          UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations (2022)

          Prejudices develop early in childhood and can drive disparities in how children treat members of different social groups. These biases can progress into xenophobic and discriminatory acts in adulthood, making it crucial to address them early in life. To effectively do so, we must first identify to what extent prejudices are inevitable or driven by cultural factors. This dissertation investigates the role of culture in children’s development of group biases and other moral processes.

          In Chapter 1, I find that assigning children to artificially constructed minimal groups (e.g., an Orange or Green group) is sufficient to induce an ingroup bias in children’s sharing behavior, and this bias overrides the desire to appear fair and generous to others. These findings suggest that children are predisposed to favor their ingroup over outgroups, but the implications for real-world groups are unclear. In Chapter 2, I address the limitations of Chapter 1 by examining how Iranian children perceive real-world outgroups that differ from their own in similarity, sociopolitical relations, and status. I find that children do not view all outgroups interchangeably, but rather base their group preferences on the relative status of the group in question. These findings highlight the need for more research in non-Western societies to further understand the complexities of children’s intergroup attitudes. Finally, in Chapter 3, I highlight the issues that arise when researchers use a standard set of measures developed primarily for Western groups to conduct cross-cultural comparisons. I propose a new two-stage model that combines standardized methods with culturally tailored items to achieve greater validity of measures and reliability of findings across different cultural groups. I demonstrate that this two-stage model is effective in capturing the moral/conventional distinction in children from Canada, India, Iran, and Korea.

          This dissertation provides key insights into the cognitive and cultural mechanisms that shape childhood prejudice and highlights new approaches for assessing the role of culture in children’s moral reasoning.

            • Article
            • Peer Reviewed
            Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Volume 38 (2016)
            The present research builds on prior work on the social-contextualnature of children’s generosity by systematically examining bothobserver effects and whether the recipient is an in-group or out-group member. Although previous research has examined thesefactors independently, no study to date has examined them inconjunction. We also extend prior research by including bothmeasures of sharing behavior and children’s evaluations of sharingscenarios, and by investigating a larger sample (N=164) with abroader age range than is typical of prior research (5- to 9-year-olds). We found that, across the entire age range tested, childrenwere generous when observed and gave more to in-group membersthan out-group members, and that there was no interaction betweenthese effects. We also found that children’s own sharing behaviorpredicted their evaluations of sharing scenarios, with childrenrating in-group sharing as "nicer" than out-group sharing.
              Cover page: The Influence of Reputation Concerns and Social Biases on Children’s SharingBehavior
              • Article
              • Peer Reviewed
              UC San Diego Previously Published Works (2023)
              People often hear stories about individuals who persist to overcome their constraints. While these stories can be motivating, emphasizing others persistence may promote unwarranted judgments about constrained individuals who do not persist. Using a developmental social inference task (Study 1a: n = 124 U.S. children, 5-12 years of age; Study 1b: n = 135 and Study 2: n = 120 U.S. adults), the present research tested whether persistence stories lead people to infer that a constrained individual who does not persist, and instead accepts the lower-quality option that is available to them, prefers it over a higher-quality option that is out of reach. Study 1 found evidence for this effect in children (1a) and adults (1b). Even persistence stories about failed outcomes, which emphasize how difficult it would have been to get the higher-quality option, had this effect. Study 2 found that the effect generalized to adults judgments about an individual facing a different type of constraint from those mentioned in the initial stories. Taken together, emphasizing others persistence may encourage unwarranted judgments about individuals who are still constrained to lower-quality options. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
                Cover page: Emphasizing others persistence can promote unwarranted social inferences in children and adults.
                • Article
                • Peer Reviewed
                UC San Diego Previously Published Works (2021)
                Much of what people do is motivated by a concern with social evaluation. We argue that the process of figuring out what others value and making effective use of this information presents significant cognitive challenges. These challenges include reasoning about the relevance of different forms of information and making inferences about the mental lives of others. They also include modifying ones behavior in light of whatever personal qualities appear to be valued in an effort to appeal to different audiences. We argue that the foundations of many of the important skills needed to meet these challenges are already in place early during childhood, but that the challenges themselves persist well into adulthood.
                  Cover page: Childrens reputation management: Learning to identify what is socially valued and acting upon it.
                  • Article
                  • Peer Reviewed
                  Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Volume 43 (2021)
                  Counterfactual theories of causal judgment propose that people infer causality between events by comparing an actual outcome with what would have happened in a relevant alternative situation. If the candidate cause is “difference-making”, people infer causality. This framework has not been applied to people’s judgments about unprecedented societal events (e.g., global pandemics), in which people have limited causal knowledge (e.g., about effective policies). In these contexts, it is less clear how people reason counterfactually. This study examined this issue. Participants judged whether a mandatory evacuation reduced population bite rates during a novel insect infestation. People tended to rely on prior causal knowledge, unless data from close alternatives (i.e., structurally similar counterfactuals) provided counterevidence. There were also notable individual differences, such that some people privileged prior knowledge regardless of the available counterevidence or privileged far alternatives (i.e., structurally distinct counterfactuals), which may have implications for understanding public disagreement about policy issues.
                    Cover page: How People Make Causal Judgments about Unprecedented Societal EventsCreative Commons 'BY' version 4.0 license
                    • Article
                    • Peer Reviewed
                    Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Volume 44 (2022)
                    Research has documented children’s understanding that a choice made when constrained to a single option is a poor indicator of another person’s preference. However, when constraints are constant over time—as they often are in social contexts—they may lose their salience. We examined whether children (N = 133, 5- to 12-year-olds) were more likely to refrain from inferring that a constrained actor prefers their choice if they first observe unconstrained actors (Alternatives condition) compared to if they only observe constrained actors (Constant condition). Presence of alternatives was crossed with constraint type: either the second option was hard to access or there was no other option. In line with our predictions, results indicated that observing alternative situations with greater choice increased children’s subsequent attention to constraints. Effects were stronger for the hard to access constraint and for older children.
                      Cover page: The Role of Alternatives in Children’s Reasoning about Constrained ChoicesCreative Commons 'BY' version 4.0 license
                      Top