| Popis: |
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science (Honours) in Psychology, University of Regina. 46 p. Antisocial and prosocial lying are evaluated similarly by typically developing children and children with conduct problems (Zanette et al., 2020). Nevertheless, children's moral reasoning regarding lying in varying social contexts, such as with friends, has not been adequately explored. The current study compared the moral evaluations and reasoning of tattling and lying for friends between children with conduct problems and typically developing children. Child participants (N = 387; 5-13 years old) were asked to evaluate how good/bad it is (moral evaluation) to either tell a lie to conceal a friend’s transgression (e.g., painting on the walls, breaking a vase) or to tell the truth about their friend’s behaviour, and why (moral reasoning). Responses to the moral reasoning question were coded using inductive coding techniques. Children with conduct problems did not differ from typically developing children in their evaluations of tattling and lying for friends: All children rated lying for friends as good and tattling on a friend as bad. However, older children rated lying for friends less favourably and rated tattling less negatively with increased age. When asked to justify why they viewed lying for friends as either good or bad, children with conduct disorder referenced the need for justice significantly less often than typically developing children. Significant differences were also observed based on children’s age. Implications for our theoretical understanding of moral development and for developing interventions to reduce excessive lying will be discussed. Student no |
