Leman, P.J., Björnberg, M (2010). Conversation, development, and gender: A study of changes in children’s concepts of punishment . Child Development, 81, 958-972.
When children speak together, they learn together – often developing more quickly than when a child learns alone. In the present study, 9 year old children discussed what would be a fair or unfair punishment. Both immediately and 8 weeks after these discussions, children made more mature judgments about fairness, but the content of conversations and the influence of gender on conversation dynamics had no influence on this development. This finding suggests that peer conversations can promote moral development, but largely because they stimulate children to reflect on a topic after the conversation is over.
Participants were 133 boys and girls from Berkshire, UK, who were individually read a series of scenarios or stories which each showed a child doing something wrong, and then asked the participants to judge which of two punishments was fairest. In each story, a less advanced option (expiatory punishment, where fairness depends on the harshness of the punishment) contrasted with a more advanced option (reciprocity, where a fair punishment puts right the wrong-doing). Some children who had given contrasting answers then discussed the topic in same sex (all boy or all girl) or mixed (girl-boy) pairs. Children were asked to make judgments again, 8 weeks after the initial discussions.
Children’s conversation dynamics were strongly affected by gender. Boys used more negative interruptions than girls, and there was a particularly high level of interruption in all-boy conversations. However, children modified their behavior in terms of the gender of the child they were talking to; most noticeably, boys reduced the amount of negative and positive interruptions they used when they spoke with a girl, compared with speaking to another boy. However, none of these factors affected the outcomes of conversation (which punishment the children chose together) or longer term changes in judgments. The content of conversations (the justifications and explanations children used to advance or defend their initial positions) also did not link to developmental changes. Having a conversation seemed to stimulate global advances in judgments about punishments, rather than promoting thinking about only one, specific scenario.
The study has implications for our understanding of how and why peer interaction leads to development and learning. It will inform programs for promoting moral development because the findings suggest that merely discussing a topic – even if that discussion is conflictual or does not explore “good” or effective arguments – can lead to changes in judgment. Moreover, at 9 years children are well aware of their own and others’ gender, and how this may influence conversation dynamics. Children can adjust their conversation styles to reflect this gender knowledge. Thus interaction in same sex and mixed pairings can be equally effective, at least in terms of outcomes for this moral judgment task.
The research was conducted by Patrick J. Leman (Royal Holloway, University of London) and Marina Björnberg (Linköping University, Sweden). It was funded by a British Academy Senior Research Fellowship to Dr Leman.