Tamis-LeMonda-05-14-2021-7

278  CHAPTER 7

introduced to new characters who either took a dropped ball away from or gave the ball back to the prosocial helper or antisocial hinderer. Both groups of infants preferred the character who gave the ball to the prosocial helper. However, only 8-month-olds preferred the agent who took the ball away from the antisocial hinderer. Thus, as infants approach the end of the first year, they appear to recognize and support the notion of punishing antisocial agents (Hamlin et al., 2011). In general, however, children do not consistently behave in line with moral retribution until about 2 years of age (Dahl, Schuck, &Campos, 2013), which coin- cides with the time that they display retribution themselves by taking resources away from someone they had observed hindering a third party (Hamlin et al., 2011). Toddlers aged 19–23 months were taught to give “treats” to different pup- pets and take treats away from puppets’ bowls. They were then shown scenarios with helper and hinderer puppets. Toddlers were more likely to give treats to the prosocial puppet and take treats away from the antisocial puppet, suggesting that they rewarded prosocial behaviors and punished antisocial behaviors. Aggression Although infants and toddlersdisplayprosocial behaviors in labandhome studies, researchers question whether infants’ behaviors stem from an understanding of right versus wrong (Dahl, 2019). In fact, as infants grow in their “helpful- ness” over the second year, they increasingly display physical aggression such as hitting, biting, pushing peers, kicking, and so on (Dahl, 2016, 2019). Tod- dlers engage in physical aggression at around 18 months of age (Coie & Dodge, 1998); and by 3 years of age, they show relational aggression , such as with- drawing or threatening to withdraw friendship, ignoring a peer, or excluding a peer from an activity (Ostrov et al., 2004). Although aggression and conflicts among toddlers may appear to be wrong, negative interactions give toddlers insight into the perspectives of others and aid the development of acceptable negotiating skills. CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING 7.20 1. Define (a) moral goodness; (b) moral understanding and evaluation; and (c) moral retribution. 2. What developmental changes are seen in moral retribution across the first three years of life? 3. Define two types of aggression that toddlers display. Self-Identity Imagine that someone asks you to describe yourself. You might refer to your physical characteristics and perhaps the things you like to do. You might talk about the internal emotions, traits, values, and beliefs that collectively define you as a unique individual. You might explain how your gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and religion—key features of identity—define who you are. Infants, however, do not understand these many aspects of self. Their self-identity remains rudimentary at best. But, it would be a mistake to ignore the early seeds of self-knowledge. Infants’ understanding of the self, although basic, sets the stage for understanding and relating to others. And so, researchers and philosophers have long been intrigued with the develop- mental origins of self-identity: In what ways do infants experience a sense of self? How does infants’ understanding of the self change over the first years of life? And how might researchers even begin to address such questions? In the sections following, you will learn about some innovative studies that have shed light on infants’ emerging self-identity. Over development, self-identity ✓ harm is caused by hurting someone’s relationships or social status, such as by threatening to withdraw a friend- ship, withdrawing a friendship, ignor- ing a peer, or excluding a peer PROPERTY OF OXFORD physical aggression  Behavior caus- ing physical harm to others, such as hitting, pushing, kicking, and biting relational aggression  A type of nonphysical aggression in which

UNIVERSITY PRESS