Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Nelson (1980): Developmental Psychology

No description
by

Carissa Rizzo

on 19 April 2015

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Nelson (1980): Developmental Psychology

Design: Study 1
This study had 4 stories that were used to define a good motive, a bad motive, a good outcome and a bad outcome. All 4 stories involved a boy throwing a ball.
Nelson (1980): Developmental Psychology
Carissa Rizzo
Monica Smith
Hannah Davidson
Period: 7

Participants: Study 1
60 pre-school children between 3 - 4 years old. Roughly equal amount of males and females.
Procedure: Study 1
Children of each age group were assigned to one of three presentations, which were verbal, motive implicit, and motive explicit.
Results: Study 1
Children in the younger group made more errors in recall for motives and outcome than the older group.
Design: Study 2
In study one, the children in the younger group in the verbal-only condition based their judgement on the motive, but not the outcome. That may be because the motive was always presented before the outcome.
Nelson thought that if children are more interested in the valence (good/bad) than the source (motive/outcome), then reversing the order would make kids disregard the motive when there was a bad outcome.
The design was the same as in study one, except this time, they presented the outcome before the motive when telling the stories
AIM: Motives and Outcomes
The aim of this study was to find out if children, as young as 3 years old, used motives and outcomes, both good and bad when judging one's behavior. This study had two studies conducted within it.
The stories all included a set of drawings illustrating the boys behavior, motive, and outcome.
The children all had to judge the boy throwing the ball in all 4 stories and decide if he was being good, bad, or neutral on a scale from "very bad", to "just okay" (neutral), to "a little bit good", to "very good"
All of the children's responses were combined to create a numerical score 1 being (very bad) to 7 (very good)
30 children in second grade between 6 - 8 years old. Roughly equal amount of males and females.
Majority of the participants were white and came from a middle - class family living in urban areas, consent was given by the parents of the children.
Participants: Study 2
Results: Study 2
Conclusion
Evaluation
Strength
: The data collected was quantitative, which allowed for the scores to be compared easily. This allowed the psychologists to easily see the effects of the children's age, motives, and outcomes on moral judgements.
Strength
: The data collected was not influenced. This allowed the psychologists to analyze the data statistically and come up with a logical conclusion about the effect of motives and outcomes on children's moral judgement.
Weakness
: The data was all collected in a quantitative form, this allowed for the psychologists to miss out on valuable information that would have given them an explanation as to why the participants chose the answer that they did.
Weakness
: The validity of the study could be affected due to the fact that the children may have answered based on what the believed was the "right way" to answer based on the pilot stories they heard, rather than answering the way that they truly believed to be correct.
27 pre-school children between the ages of 3 - 4 years old. The mean age was 3.8 years old.
The children were randomly assigned to a presentation type. The types were verbal only, motive-implicit picture, or motive-explicit picture
This was the same as study 1, although this time the description of the outcome came before the description of the motive.
Motive is a powerful tool used by younger children to make a moral judgement.
The mode of presentation affects the judgements of younger children with verbal-only presentation of material.
If a child hears something "bad" , any other information will have a limited impact on judgements.
If presentation involves pictures, the judgements are based on both outcome and motive.
Younger children are more likely to recall information on moral judgements more accurately if congruence is experienced, rather than incongruence.

The main finding was that children in the verbal-only condition were less influenced by motive than those in both picture conditions.
Children made more errors of recall when the motive and outcome were different
Children familiarized themselves with the 7-point faces scale via two stores (one about being very good and the other about being very bad).
The children were told to listen very carefully to each story because they were expected to tell it again later. After each story, they were asked if the boy was good, bad or jut okay. Then they had to indicate via the face how good or bad he was.
If children were in one of the picture conditions, the pictures were introduced at the appropriate times and stayed in front of the kids until they made their judgement. After they made their judgements, the pictures went away the children had to retell the story aloud.
The main character in the good motive conditions combined has an average score of 5.35, and the main character in the bad motive had an average of 2.37.
Good outcomes scored 4.70 on average and bad motives were only 2.92 on average.
When the motive or outcome was bad, there was a larger effect on judgements than there would have been if either were good.
There were more errors of recall in the younger group when the motive and outcome were incongruent.
Full transcript