Through cooperation, it is possible to achieve goals that are impossible to
accomplish as an individual. However, there are also risks that lie in
cooperation. A partner might be tempted to abandon a joint endeavor.
Forming joint commitments can help to reduce the uncertainty and
facilitate cooperation.
The first study, explored children’s reactions to a partner’s failure to
perform their role in a joint commitment. Three-year-olds showed more
protest against a partner who defected selfishly and knowingly, but
restrained from protest if a partner stopped cooperating due to a reason
outside of his control. Interestingly, they also tried to teach their partner if
he appeared willing but incompetent. In the second study, I investigated
whether 3- and 5-year-olds could be bribed to abandon a collaborative
partner who relies on them, a dependent partner with whom they made an
explicit joint commitment, or an independent partner. Children of both ages
showed some level of commitment to their partner in the face of alternative
individual rewards if an explicit joint commitment was formed. However,
only 5-year-olds understood a partner’s dependence as a binding obligation.
The third study asked whether children understand the dissolvability of
joint commitments and explored their reaction to a partner’s disengagement
from a joint task depending on how the partner dissolves the commitment.
Children accepted a partner’s disengagement after a proper and joint
revocation and resented a partner who just left the task or did not dissolve
appropriately.
Taken together, the studies demonstrate that at 3 years of age, children
understand the obligations that lie within an explicit joint commitment
both when it is owed to them and when they owe it to a partner.
Competencies regarding more implicit and situational commitments seem
to develop later at around 5 years of age.:Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
1 General Introduction
1.1 Cooperation – a note on terminology
1.2 Theoretical perspectives on cooperative actions
1.2.1 Michael Bratman on defining features of a shared activity
1.2.2 Raimo Tuomela on social modes of cooperation
1.2.3 John R. Searle on the role of shared intentions in joint action
1.2.4 Stephen L. Darwall and the second-personal standpoint
1.3 An evolutionary perspective on cooperation - the Interdependence
Hypothesis
1.4 Joint Commitments
1.4.1 Margaret Gilbert – commitments in the strict sense
1.4.2 John Michael – the sense of commitment
1.5 Children’s developing understanding of and competences to collaborate and
engage in joint commitments: Empirical Findings
1.6 Focus of the Dissertation
2 Study 1: Three-Year-Olds’ Reactions to a Partner’s Failure to Perform Her
Role in a Joint Commitment
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Method
2.2.1 Participants
2.2.2 Materials and Design
2.2.3 Procedure
2.2.4 Coding and Reliability
2.3 Results
2.3.1 Analysis
2.3.2 Protest
2.3.3 Tattling
2.3.4 Emotional Arousal
2.3.5 Teaching
2.4 Discussion
3 Study 2: Three- and 5-year-old children’s adherence to explicit and implicit
joint commitments
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Methods
3.2.1 Participants
3.2.2 Materials and Design
3.2.3 Procedure
3.2.4 Coding and Reliability
3.3 Results
3.4 Discussion
4 Study 3: Three- and 5-year-old children’s understanding of how to dissolve a
joint commitment
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Method
4.2.1 Participants
4.2.2 Materials and Design
4.2.3 Procedure
4.2.4 Coding and Reliability
4.3 Results
4.3.1 Protest
4.3.2 Latency before playing alone
4.3.3 Scold the puppet
4.3.4 Bracelet for the puppet
4.3.5 Bead sharing and tattling
4.3.6 Preferred future play partner
4.4 Discussion
4.5 Appendix
Summary
Zusammenfassung
References
Wissenschaftlicher Lebenslauf
Verzeichnis wissenschaftlicher Publikationen
Nachweis über Anteile der Co-Autoren
Selbstständigkeitserklärung
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:DRESDEN/oai:qucosa:de:qucosa:34783 |
| Date | 01 August 2019 |
| Creators | Kachel, Ulrike |
| Contributors | Universität Leipzig |
| Source Sets | Hochschulschriftenserver (HSSS) der SLUB Dresden |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion, doc-type:doctoralThesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis, doc-type:Text |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0019 seconds