The Development of Inequity Aversion in Children Aged 5~9 and Its Influencing Factors

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240114

Abstract

Abstract: Fairness is a social norm to regulate people’s communication. The individual’s negative feeling and strong reaction to unfairness characterize inequity aversion, which can be divided into disadvantageous inequity aversion and advantageous inequity aversion. Previous studies have shown that the development of children’s inequity aversion was affected by a variety of factors, but the questions of whether different distribution modes would affect children’s two types of inequity aversion, and how distribution mode influences the two types of inequity aversion under the influence of ingroup and outgroup or reputation and other factors are still needed to be further explored. Therefore, two experiments were conducted to explore the developmental characteristics of children’s disadvantageous and advantageous inequity aversions.
In experiment 1, 240 children aged 5, 6, and 7 were selected as participants in a real assignment situation. The developmental characteristics of children’s disadvantageous inequity aversion under the different distribution modes and whether it was influenced by the factor of ingroup and outgroup were investigated by using a modified paradigm of assignment of additional resources. The results showed that: (1) The disadvantageous inequity aversion decreased with the growth of children’s age, and 7-year-old was the turning point. (2) Children’s disadvantageous inequity aversion caused by self-distribution was significantly lower than that caused by others-distribution. (3) Children’s disadvantageous inequity aversion caused by ingroup members was significantly lower than that caused by outgroup members. (4) Children’s disadvantageous inequity aversion caused by the ingroup members was significantly lower than that caused by the outgroup members under the condition of self-distribution, while there was no significant difference in children’s disadvantageous inequity aversion caused by the ingroup and outgroup members under the condition of others-distribution. (5) The 6-year-old children’s disadvantageous inequity aversion caused by self-distribution was significantly lower than that caused by others-distribution. However, there was no significant difference between 5- and 7-year-old children in the disadvantageous inequity aversion caused by the two distribution modes.
In experiment 2, 240 children aged 7, 8, and 9 were selected as participants in a real assignment situation. The developmental characteristics of children’s advantageous inequity aversion under the different distribution modes and whether it was influenced by the factor of reputation were investigated by using the modified paradigm of assignment of additional resources. The results were as follows: (1) The advantageous inequity aversion increased as children grew older, and 8-year-old was the turning point. (2) Children’s advantageous inequity aversion caused by reputation was significantly higher than that caused by no reputation. For children aged 7- and 9-year-old, their advantageous inequity aversion caused by reputation was significantly higher than that caused by no reputation, while there was no significant difference in the 8-year-old children’s advantageous inequity aversion between the condition of reputation and no reputation. (3) The effect of distribution mode on advantageous inequity aversion was not significant, and children’s advantageous inequity aversion under both two distribution modes was low.
In conclusion, the research showed that children’s two types of inequity aversion have different developmental patterns, and can be affected by the distribution mode and the factors such as ingroup and outgroup or reputation.

Key words: inequity aversion, disadvantageous inequity aversion, advantageous inequity aversion, distribution mode, ingroup and outgroup, reputation

摘要： 不公平厌恶分为不利不公平厌恶和有利不公平厌恶。为了考察儿童不公平厌恶的发展特点,实验1和实验2通过设置真实的分配情境,采用分配额外资源任务的变式,分别研究分配方式和内外群体对5~7岁儿童不利不公平厌恶的影响以及分配方式和声誉对7~9岁儿童有利不公平厌恶的影响。结果发现：不利不公平厌恶随儿童年龄增长而降低,7岁是转折年龄; 有利不公平厌恶随儿童年龄增长而升高,8岁是转折年龄; 自我分配和内群体成员引起的不利不公平厌恶低于他人分配和外群体成员,但两种分配方式下的儿童有利不公平厌恶均较低; 声誉会增加儿童的有利不公平厌恶,且在年龄上表现出不平衡性。研究说明儿童两类不公平厌恶的年龄发展趋势不同,并且会受到分配方式以及内外群体或声誉等因素的影响。

关键词: 不公平厌恶, 不利不公平厌恶, 有利不公平厌恶, 分配方式, 内外群体, 声誉

Jiang Yi, Ding Fang. The Development of Inequity Aversion in Children Aged 5~9 and Its Influencing Factors[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2024, 47(1): 113-120.

姜怡, 丁芳 . 5~9岁儿童不公平厌恶的发展及其影响因素 ^*[J]. 心理科学, 2024, 47(1): 113-120.

References

[1] 丁芳, 郭勇. (2010). 儿童心理理论、移情与亲社会行为的关系. 心理科学, 33(3), 660-662.
[2] 林崇德. (2018). 发展心理学. 人民教育出版社.
[3] 孙倩, 龙长权, 王修欣, 刘永芳.(2019).公平或是利益?权力对分配公平感的影响, 心理学报, 51(8), 958-968.
[4] 谭千保,邓磊, 张湘一, 常志彬,欧阳益. (2019) . 社会距离与分配差距对儿童有利不公平厌恶的影响,心理科学, 42(5), 1141-1147.
[5] 王斯, 苏彦捷. (2013). 从理解到使用: 心理理论与儿童不同情境中的分配公平性. 心理学报, 45(11), 1242-1250.
[6] 朱莉琪, 皇甫刚, Keller, M., 牟毅, 陈单枝. (2008). 从博弈游戏看儿童经济决策行为的发展. 心理学报, 40(4), 402-408.
[7] Beugré, C. D. (2009). Exploring the neural basis of fairness: A model of neuro-organizational justice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(2), 129-139.
[8] Blake, P. R., & McAuliffe, K. (2011). "I had so much it didn' t seem fair": Eight-year-olds reject two forms of inequity. Cognition, 120(2), 215-224.
[9] Chernyak, N., & Kushnir, T. (2013). Giving preschoolers choice increases sharing behavior. Psychological Science, 24(10), 1971-1979.
[10] Choshen-Hillel S., Shaw A., & Caruso E. M. (2015). Waste management: How reducing partiality can promote efficient resource allocation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(2), 210-231.
[11] Corbit J., McAuliffe K., Callaghan T. C., Blake P. R., & Warneken F. (2017). Children' s collaboration induces fairness rather than generosity. Cognition, 168, 344-356.
[12] Crockett M. J., Clark L., Tabibnia G., Lieberman M. D., & Robbins T. W. (2008). Serotonin modulates behavioral reactions to unfairness. Science, 320(5884), 1739.
[13] Dufwenberg, M., & Kirchsteiger, G. (2004). A theory of sequential reciprocity. Games and Economic Behavior, 47(2), 268-298.
[14] Emler, N. (1984). Differential involvement in delinquency: Toward an interpretation in terms of reputation management. Progress in Experimental Personality Research, 13, 173-239.
[15] Fehr E., Bernhard H., & Rockenbach B. (2008). Egalitarianism in young children. Nature, 454(7208), 1079-1083.
[16] Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817-868.
[17] Harrison, G, W., & McCabe, K.A. (1996), Expectation and faimess in a simple bargaining experiment. Imternational Journal of Game Theon, 25(3), 303-327.
[18] Henrich J., McElreath R., Barr A., Ensminger J., Barrett C., Bolyanatz A., & Ziker J. (2006). Costly punishment across human societies. Science, 312(5781), 1767-1770.
[19] Homans, G. C. (1974). Social behavior: Its elementary forms. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
[20] Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
[21] Kogut, T. (2012). Knowing what I should, doing what I want: From selfishness to inequity aversion in young children' s sharing behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(1), 226-236.
[22] Kohlberg, L. (1966). Moral education in the schools: A developmental view. The School Review, 74(1), 1-30.
[23] Leimar, O., & Hammerstein, P. (2001). Evolution of cooperation through indirect reciprocity. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 268(1468), 745-753.
[24] Li O., Xu F. M., & Wang L. (2018). Advantageous inequity aversion does not always exist: The role of determining allocations modulates preferences for advantageous inequity. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 749.
[25] McAuliffe K., Blake P. R., Steinbeis N., & Warneken F. (2017). The developmental foundations of human fairness. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(2), Article 0042.
[26] Moore, C. (2009). Fairness in children' s resource allocation depends on the recipient. Psychological Science, 20(8), 944-948.
[27] Neiworth J. J., Johnson, E. T Whillock., Greenberg, J, & Brown, V.(2009). Is a sense of inequiy an ancestral primate train? Tesing social inequity in cotton top tamarins (Saguinus oedipus). Journal of Comparalive Psychology, 123(1), 10-17.
[28] Olson, K. R., & Dweck, C. S. (2009). Social cognitive development: A new look. Child Development Perspectives, 3(1), 60-65.
[29] Qiu X., Yu J., Li T., Cheng. N., & Zhu L. (2017), Children' s inequity aversion in procedural justice context: A comparison of advantageous and disadvantageous inequity. Frontiers in Psvchology, 8, Article 1855.
[30] Rabin, M. (1993). Incorporating fairness into game theory and economics. The American Economic Review, 83(5), 1281-1302.
[31] Rapp D. J., Engelmann J. M., Herrmann E., & Tomasello M. (2019). Young children' s reputational strategies in a peer group context. Developmental Psychology, 55(2), 329-336.
[32] Rode, J., & Le Menestrel, M. (2011). The influence of decision power on distributive fairness. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 79(3), 246-255.
[33] Shaw A., Choshen-Hillel S., & Caruso E. M. (2016). The development of inequity aversion: Understanding when (and why) people give others the bigger piece of the pie. Psychological Science, 27(10), 1352-1359.
[34] Shaw A., DeScioli P., & Olson K. R. (2012). Fairness versus favoritism in children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(6), 736-745.
[35] Shaw, A., Montinari, N, Piovesan, M, Olson, K. R, Gino, P, & Norton, M. I. (2014). Children develop a veil of fairness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(1), 363-375.
[36] Smith, A. (1982). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Liberty Fund.
[37] Thaler, R. H. (1988). Anomalies: The ultimatum game. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(4), 195-206.
[38] Yazdi H., Heyman G. D., & Barner D. (2020). Children are sensitive to reputation when giving to both ingroup and outgroup members. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 194, Article 104814.
[39] Zhang, Z. (2020). The impact of social relationships on children' s distributive justice. Developmental Psychology, 56(1), 103-116.
DOI:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20240114