hide
Free keywords:
Cooperation, Reasonableness, Argumentation, Reasoning, Partner choice, Explanation
Abstract:
When reasoning with others, the reasons used in an exchange can have varying degrees of quality, irrespective of the facts under discussion. Partners often evaluate one another’s evaluation of reasons – one another’s reasoning. Can children evaluate their partner’s judgment of the quality of reasons independent of objective truth? 5- and 7-year-olds (N = 122) chose among two partners for cooperation. In the experimental condition, one acceded to a good reason, the other to a poor reason. In the control condition, each agreed to a different good reason. Crucially, in both conditions, both partners arrived at the wrong conclusion. Results suggested that 7-year-olds, and 5-year-olds to a lesser degree, chose the partner who endorsed the good reason in the experimental condition, but showed no preference for partners in the control condition. Thus, young children distinguish good from poor reasons, even if neither leads to success, and choose partners who do the same.
