Sulking behavior and the emergence of hurt feelings in young children

When do hurt feelings develop? The emotion of feeling hurt is vital for close relationships because it signals that one has been devalued illegitimately, potentially eliciting guilt and the motivation to repair in the partner. We approached the question of when hurt feelings develop by studying the emergence of sulking behavior as an indicator of hurt feelings. In an online-questionnaire study, parents and teachers hypothesized that children begin to sulk during the first 3 years (N = 125). In a cross-sectional event-based diary study, parents observed their 1- to 8-year-old children (N = 40). We found that the youngest child sulked at 20 months of age and that the probability of sulking was at 50% for a child at 25 months. Finally, we conducted a longitudinal event-based diary study where parents observed their children from 16 months on until they sulked for the first time and, at the longest, until their third birthday (N = 29). We found that the probability of sulking was at 25% at 21 months, at 50% for a child at 24–25 months, and at 75% at 28 months, thus, confirming and specifying the results of studies 1 and 2. These findings indicate that the emotion of hurt feelings emerges mainly during the end of the second and the third year. We discuss the limitations of our approach and why and how the development of hurt feelings in the sense of an appraisal needs to be addressed differently

Developing a coding system for sulking behavior in young children

Children’s sulking behavior is a salient yet understudied emotional phenomenon. It has been hypothesized to result from hurt feelings, humiliation, and anger, and might thus function as a nonverbal measure in the behavioral studies of these emotions. We conducted three studies that served to develop a comprehensive coding system for children’s sulking behavior. The first study explored sulking features in an online survey that used parental and teacher reports. In an event-based parental diary study, we reevaluated the importance of each feature based on its frequency across episodes of sulking behavior and analyzed the time course of sulking episodes. Finally, we analyzed YouTube videos and demonstrated that the coding system could be reliably applied. We also determined a minimal number of necessary features as a classification threshold. The resulting coding system includes the following features: becoming silent, distancing, turning away, gaze avoidance, crossing arms, lowering head, pouting lips, lowered eyebrows, and, probably, utterances of illegitimate devaluation, and relational distancing. Thus, all varieties of sulking seem to have withdrawal from an ongoing interaction in common

Games and enculturation: A cross-cultural analysis of games and values in Austronesia

While most animals play, only humans play games. As animal play serves to teach offspring important life-skills in a safe scenario, human games might, in similar ways, teach important culturally relevant skills. Humans in all cultures play games; however, it is not clear whether variation in the characteristics of games across cultural groups is related to group-level attributes. Here we investigate specifically whether the cooperativeness of games covaries with socio-ecological differences across cultural groups. We hypothesize that cultural groups that engage in frequent inter-group conflict, cooperative sustenance acquisition, or that have less stratified social structures, might more frequently play cooperative games as compared to groups that do not share these characteristics. To test these hypotheses, we gathered data from the ethnographic record on 25 ethnolinguistic groups in the Austronesian language family. We show that cultural groups with higher levels of inter-group conflict and cooperative land-based hunting play cooperative games more frequently than other groups. Additionally, cultural groups with higher levels of intra-group conflict play competitive games more frequently than other groups. These findings indicate that games are not randomly distributed among cultures, but rather relate to the socio-ecological settings of the cultural groups that practice them. We argue that games serve as training grounds for group-specific norms and values and thereby have an important function in enculturation during childhood. Moreover, games might server an important role in the maintenance of cultural diversity.Introduction Children’s play Games Possible drivers of cooperative goal structures - Interdependence in foraging. - Intra- and inter-group conflict. Lack of social stratification Methods - Games - Cultural covariate data - Statistical analyses Results - Descriptive statistics - Cultural variables and goal structures Discussion Conclusio

Playing a cooperative game promotes preschoolers’ sharing with third-parties, but not social inclusion

This study examined the effect of gaming context on young children’s prosocial behaviors. Dyads of 4- to 5-year-old children (N = 96) played the same game cooperatively, competitively, or solitarily. After playing the game for a total of ten minutes, sharing with and social inclusion of uninvolved third-parties as well as free play with previous co-players was observed. Children shared less with third-parties after playing the game competitively than after playing it cooperatively. Playing a solitary game resulted in intermediate levels of sharing. The structure of the game did not differentially impact measures of social inclusion or free play

The Austronesian game taxonomy: A cross-cultural dataset of historical games

Humans in most cultures around the world play rule-based games, yet research on the content and structure of these games is limited. Previous studies investigating rule-based games across cultures have either focused on a small handful of cultures, thus limiting the generalizability of findings, or used cross-cultural databases from which the raw data are not accessible, thus limiting the transparency, applicability, and replicability of research findings. Furthermore, games have long been defined as competitive interactions, thereby blinding researchers to the cross-cultural variation in the cooperativeness of rule-based games. The current dataset provides ethnographic, historic information on games played in cultural groups in the Austronesian language family. These game descriptions (Ngames = 907) are available and codeable for researchers interested in games. We also develop a unique typology of the cooperativeness of the goal structure of games and apply this typology to the dataset. Researchers are encouraged to use this dataset to examine cross-cultural variation in the cooperativeness of games and further our understanding of human cultural behaviour on a larger scale.Background and summary Methods - Defining games. - Defining the goal structure of games Search criteria and methodology - eHRAF - Pulotu - American Anthropologist - The Journal of the Polynesian Society - Additional sources Data records - Variable definitions - Descriptive statistics of games Technical validation - Cultural group identifiers - Record linkage - Filtering and coding of games - Austronesian language phylogeny Research opportunitie

The distinctive constitution of feeling hurt: A Review and a Lazarian theory

What is the nature of feeling hurt? This question is answered by systematically reviewing and integrating theories and empirical findings on feeling hurt using Lazarus’ theory of emotion. Following this approach, feeling hurt is constituted by a primary appraisal of an illegitimate devaluation and by a secondary appraisal of low controllability. This appraisal pattern activates an action tendency to withdraw from an interaction. This theory leads to several hypotheses for the appraisal (e.g., that an increase in appraisals of controllability should turn hurt into anger) on facial, bodily, and behavioral expressions as well as on the communicative function of feeling hurt. Furthermore, important conceptual distinctions between a broad and a narrow concept of feeling hurt as well as between feeling hurt as an emotion and a long-term emotional episode of hurt are introduced. Finally, feeling hurt is compared with humiliation, shame, guilt, disappointment, sadness, and anger

Approaching the development of hurt feelings in childhood

When do hurt feelings develop? In this paper, we want to set the stage for empirical investigations that can answer this neglected question. Thus, we present an integrative theory of hurt feelings according to which hurt feelings in their narrow sense consist of (a) a primary appraisal of an illegitimate devaluation, (b) a secondary appraisal of low controllability, (c) an action tendency to withdraw, and (d) the communicative function to signal that one has been wronged, and is expecting reparation. We argue that sulking behavior can be used as an approach to studying hurt feelings in young children because the same appraisals are assumed to underlie sulking. Thus, we review what is known about pouting as a facial expression and sulking behavior. After discussing the ontogeny of two important eliciting situations of hurt feelings—abandonment and sibling favoritism, we preliminarily conclude that relevant behaviors are not present in jealousy experiments that involve a situation of discrimination and that hurt feelings seem not yet present in the Ainsworth Strange Situation at twelve months of age. Finally, we review empirical studies on shame, pride, guilt and social norms because they relate to the same motivational topic of legitimacy and social evaluation. In summary, this review suggests that it is likely that sulking behavior and thus hurt feelings in their narrow sense begin to develop at the end of the second year, together with other self-conscious emotions, but that empirical investigations are strongly needed