Running Head: HARMING FRIENDS AND SIBLINGS “Two for flinching”: Children’s and Adolescents ’ Narrative Accounts of Harming Their Friends and Siblings

This study investigated differences in children’s and adolescents ’ experiences of harming their siblings and friends. Participants (N = 101; 7-, 11-, and 16-year-olds) provided accounts of events when they hurt a younger sibling and a friend. Harm against friends was described as unusual, unforeseeable, and circumstantial. By contrast, harm against siblings was described as typical, ruthless, angry, and provoked, but also elicited more negative moral judgments and more feelings of remorse and regret. Whereas younger children were more self-oriented with siblings and other-oriented with friends, accounts of harm across relationships became somewhat more similar with age. Results provide insight into how these two relationships serve as distinct contexts for sociomoral development. HARMING FRIENDS AND SIBLINGS 3 “Two for flinching”: Children’s and Adolescents ’ Narrative Accounts of Harming Their Friends and Siblings It has long been recognized that children’s close relationships with other children are fundamental contexts for their moral development (Piaget, 1932; Sullivan, 1953). Through their shared histories with familiar others, children learn about moral concepts such as rights, justice

The Juxtaposition of Revenge and Forgiveness in Peer Conflict Experiences of Youth Exposed to Violence

In a sample of 95 urban Colombian mid-adolescents, this mixed-method study examined how youths’ retaliatory desires and actions were juxtaposed with forgiveness and nonforgiveness in their narrative accounts of peer conflict. Quantitative analyses examined how retaliatory desire and action were associated with variations in youths’ lifetime exposure to violence and recent victimization by peers at school. These measures of violence exposure were related to revenge only in the context of unforgiven harms. Qualitative analyses explored aspects of youths’ narrative accounts that may underlie the observed associations. Overall, findings suggest that exposure to violence may interfere with youths’ capacity to reflect on revenge in ways that recognize their own fallibility and thus open the door to forgiveness

Distinctions between experiences of anger and sadness in children's and adolescents' narrative accounts of peer injury

Children’s varied emotions following peer injury may reflect distinct ways of understanding and coping with such events. This study examined how children’s references to anger and sadness in their accounts of peer injury were differentially related to narrative descriptions of their motivations, interpretations, evaluations, and behavioral responses, as well as the relationships in which harm occurred. We also explored how these associations between emotions and other narrative elements varied with age. The study was based on a corpus of 275 transcripts of oral narratives recounted by equal numbers of boys and girls across three age groups: 7, 11, and 16 years. In line with functionalist theories, anger was uniquely linked to maximizing attributions, indignation, and aggression, after accounting for age and gender. Sadness was related to harm in close relationships and relational goals, underlining the value placed on relationships with the offender, as well as a sense of powerlessness and confusion. Some associations between emotions and other narrative elements varied with age, suggesting that children’s experiences of anger and sadness became increasingly agentic and relationally oriented. Findings suggest how narrative constructions of meaning about peer injury may serve as contexts for reflecting on how anger and sadness emerge from and are resolved through interpersonal relationships

Vagaries and Complexities in the Emotional Experience of Doing Harm Emotion and the Moral Life: Introductory Remarks

Far from being unthinking energies or irrational impulses that control or push people around, emotions are intricately connected to the way people perceive, understand, and think about the world. 1 As such, emotions are also an inextricable part of people’s moral lives. As people go about making moral judgments and decisions, they do not merely apply abstract principles in a detached manner. Their emotions—their loves and sympathies, angers and fears, grief and sadness, guilt and shame—are inseparable from how they make sense of and evaluate their own and others ’ actions, the way things are, and the ways things ought to be. While this is not to say that emotions have a privileged role in morality, it does mean that emotions cannot be reasonably sidelined from the study of people’s actual moral lives. Thus, an important part of formulating a theory of moral development is to articulate a framework for capturing children’s relevant emotional experiences in the context of morally-laden events, and for understanding how these sometimes turbulent or bewildering experiences inform, enrich, and change their thinking about what is right and wrong and about themselves as moral agents. In this chapter, we first consider briefly the existing research on the relation between emotion and moral thinking. Next, we offer a perspective that aims to broaden and complicate our understanding of the connections between emotion and morality in adolescence, and set a new agenda for research on thi

Beyond Post-Traumatic Stress: Pressing Questions about the Psychological Impact of Political Violence on Children

We, developmental psychologists, have learned that starting at the age of 2-3 children are consistently bothered by injustice and are concerned with people being hurt, physically or psychologically (Smetana, 2006; Turiel, 1998; Wainryb et al, 2005). This seems to be true around the world. Studies have been conducted in South American countries (such Brazil and Colombia), in China

When victims don’t cry: Children’s understandings of victimization, compliance, and subversion

How do children understand situations in which the targets of moral transgressions do not complain about the way they are treated? One – hundred and twenty participants aged 5, 7, 10, 13, and 16 years were interviewed about hypothetical situations in which one child (‘‘transgressor’’) made an apparently unfair demand of another child (‘‘victim’’), who then responded by either resisting, complying, or subverting. In general, 5-year-olds judged compliance positively and resistance negatively and 7- to 16-year-olds judged resistance positively and compliance negatively; all but 16-year-olds judged subversion negatively. Most participants judged the transgressor’s actions negatively, regardless of how the victim had responded. The findings are discussed in terms of their implications for children’s developing understandings of victimization. A large body of moral development research has shown that, starting in their preschool years, children think that it is morally wrong to hurt others or to treat others unfairly. Children’s concern for the targets of such acts (henceforth referred to as ‘‘victims’’) has been said to constitute the cornerstone of their moral judgments. Research has indeed shown that children’s negative judgments of instances of unfair treatment and physical or psychological harm rest on their understanding that such behaviors target unwilling victims (for comprehensive research reviews, see Smetana, 2006; Turiel, 1998). It has been furthermore suggested that children’s attention to the victims ’ emotional response is central to the development of their moral understandings (e.g., Arseni

Children\u27s Narrative Accounts and Judgments of Their Own Peer-Exclusion Experiences

Although exclusion is commonly thought of as a form of relational or social aggression, it often reflects attempts at maintaining friendships, drawing group boundaries, and optimizing group functioning and can thus also be considered an inevitable feature of normative social interactions. This study examines the narrative accounts and judgments of children’s own experiences with peer exclusion. Eighty-four participants, aged 7, 12, and 17, provided one narrative account of a time when they had been excluded (victim) and one of a time when they had excluded someone else (perpetrator). Narratives differed in several expected ways, depending on the perspective from which they were told. Nevertheless, from both perspectives, participants referred to the reasons underlying the exclusion. Notably, also, from both perspectives, participants seldom referred to the victim’s emotions. Significant age differences in types of exclusionary behaviors, perpetrator’s role, and evaluations suggest age-related changes in the meanings of exclusion, with adolescents becoming increasingly attuned to the complexities and inevitability of exclusion. No significant gender differences were observed. Overall, this study provided insight into how the multifaceted nature of exclusion gets played out in children’s real-life experiences

Narratives about the past and cognitive polyphasia: Remembering the argentine conquest of the desert

The Conquest of the Desert was a military campaign waged by the Argentine government against the indigenous population during the late 19th century. This period of national organization and territorial expansion involved the extermination of the native populations, with thousands being killed or sold to wealthy landowners. This article reports the findings from an ethnographic study conducted in a city founded by the military forces during this period, where nowadays descendants of the military men and the European immigrants live alongside the descendants of the original inhabitants. In observations of the symbolic resources of the city and in interviews and discussions with descendants of European and military men, we identified 2 distinct narratives about this historical process: a traditional account concerning the peaceful coexistence of colonizers and indigenous groups, and a revisionist account that emphasizes the genocide of indigenous groups and the looting of their lands by the Argentine military. We consider the juxtaposition of these 2 narratives as an expression of a state of cognitive polyphasia that allows Argentine people to espouse a "politically correct" version of the past while, at the same time, denying the conflict between colonizers and indigenous groups. We submit that this juxtaposition serves to make it possible for them to cope with the collective guilt that arises in relation to their ancestors´ behavior, while at the same time delegitimizing ongoing indigenous claims about past injustices and the need for historical reparation.Fil: Barreiro, Alicia Viviana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires; ArgentinaFil: Wainryb, Cecilia. University Of Utah; Estados UnidosFil: Carretero, Mario. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; España. Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales; Argentin

Two Sides to Every Story? Parents’ Attributions of Culpability and Their Interventions Into Sibling Conflict

This study examined associations between parents\u27 attributions of culpability and their observed interventions into sibling conflict. A total of 61 primary caregivers judged who was at fault for a sibling conflict and subsequently discussed the event with their two children (aged 4–10 years). Nonunilateral fault attributions (blaming both children or neither child) were related to parents\u27 discussion of the reasons underlying children\u27s behavior/perspectives and were more frequent when the age gap between children was larger. Parents selectively referred to their younger child\u27s point of view in conversation and, when the age gap was larger, selectively provided evidence in favor of their younger child. Results extend previous research by providing novel insight into how parents\u27 conflict judgments are linked to their intervention strategies with older and younger siblings and by identifying the circumstances in which parents intervene in ways that promote children\u27s mutual understanding and constructive conflict strategies