"There are no band-aids for emotions": The development of thinking about emotional harm.

An understanding of harm is central to social and cognitive development, but harm largely has been conceptualized as physical damage or injury. Less research focuses on children's judgments of harm to others' internal well-being (emotional harms). We asked 5- to 10-year-old children (N = 456, 50% girls, 50% boys; primarily tested in Central New York, with socioeconomic diversity, but limited racial/ethnic or linguistic diversity) to compare emotional and physical harms. In Experiment 1, children compared simple harms (intended and completed) and then scenarios in which the perpetrator's intention did not match the outcome (intended emotional harm, but caused physical harm, or vice-versa). Assessments of the severity of emotional (vs. physical) harm increased with age and depended on the perpetrator's intentions. In Experiment 2, children saw emotional and physical harms that were: Simple (intended and completed); Incomplete (intended, but not completed); or Accidental (not intended, but completed). Children evaluated physical and emotional harms in isolation and then compared the two. Judgments of the relative severity of emotional harm increased with age, but only when intentions and outcomes were both present. This reflected an increase with age in children's perceptions that emotional harm was hurtful, whereas perceptions of physical harm were relatively stable across development. With age, children also increasingly associated emotional harms with longer-term impacts (being remembered and reoccurring). These findings suggest reasoning about the severity, underlying intentions, and duration of emotional harm shifts with age. The results hold implications for moral development, law and psychology, and emotional-harm-related interventions including those addressing bullying. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Crime but not punishment? Children are more lenient toward rule-breaking when the "spirit of the law" is unbroken.

Even early in development, children understand how rules work, and they harshly evaluate rule violators. Furthermore, we know that adults make nuanced evaluations about rule violations; in many situations, they believe that it can be acceptable to violate the technical language of a rule (the "letter of a rule") if doing so does not violate the reason why the rule was created (the "spirit of the rule"). Distinguishing between the letter and spirit of a rule is critical for a developed normative understanding. We investigated whether and when children begin to believe that it is less wrong to violate the letter of a rule if one does not violate the rule's spirit. Participants (N = 246 4- to 10-year-olds) were asked to evaluate a rule-breaker who either violated the letter of a rule but not the spirit or violated both the letter and spirit of a rule. We found that by 4 years of age, children acknowledged that the rule had technically been broken in both cases, but their evaluations of the rule-breaker were much more lenient in the case where the spirit of the rule remained intact. We also found that children are increasingly more lenient in the case where the spirit of the rule remains intact case as they age, and they are increasingly harsher in the case where the spirit is violated. We discuss how these studies provide insight into early normative reasoning, including implications for future research on social cognitive development, rule learning, and legislative intent.

Unskilled and Don't Want to Be Aware of It: The Effect of Self-Relevance on the Unskilled and Unaware Phenomenon.

Previous research found that poor performers tend to overestimate how well their performance compares to others'. This unskilled and unaware effect has been attributed to poor performers' lack of metacognitive ability to realize their ineptitude. We contend that the unskilled are motivated to ignore (be unaware of) their poor performance so that they can feel better about themselves. We tested this idea in an experiment in which we manipulated the perceived self-relevancy of the task to men and women after they had completed a visual pun task and before they estimated their performance on the task. As predicted, the unskilled and unaware effect was attenuated when the task was perceived to have low self-relevance.