The nature of moral judgments is continuously debated by developmental psychologists. For instance, are moral judgments reason-based and/or emotion-based, and to what extent are moral judgments experience-dependent versus experience-independent? This paper discusses how methodological concerns impact the investigation of moral judgments and provides an emotion-based intuitive definition of morality that encourages the empirical exploration of whether moral evaluations emerge in the absence of relevant experience and before complex reasoning abilities arise. Evidence is reviewed suggesting that preverbal infants evaluate third parties based on their morally relevant acts, positively evaluating prosocial others and negatively evaluating antisocial others. Several unanswered questions are considered, including to what extent infants’ evaluations are rooted in emotion and whether they distinguish social versus moral concerns.

Keywords:
Infants, Reason, Emotions, Moral evaluations, Moral judgments
1.
Adolph, K.E., Vereijken, B., & Denny, M.A. (1998). Learning to crawl. Child Development, 669, 1299–1312. doi: 10.2307/1132267
2.
Anderson, S.W., Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A.R. (1999). Impairment of social and moral behavior related to early damage in human prefrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 1032–1037. doi: 10.1038/14833
3.
Axelrod, R., & Hamilton, W.D. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211, 1390–1396. doi: 10.1126/science.7466396
4.
Baillargeon, R., Spelke, E.S., & Wasserman, S. (1985). Object permanence in five-month-old infants. Cognition, 20, 191–208. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(85)90008-3
5.
Baird, J.A., & Astington, J.W. (2004). The role of mental state understanding in the development of moral cognition and moral action. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2004, 37–49. doi: 10.1002/cd.96
6.
Barclay, P. (2006). Reputational benefits for altruistic punishment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 325–344. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.01.003
7.
Baumard, N., André, J.B., & Sperber, D. (2013). A mutualistic approach to morality: The evolution of fairness by partner choice. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36, 59–78. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X11002202
8.
Behne, T., Carpenter, M., Call, J., & Tomasello, M. (2005). Unwilling versus unable: Infants’ understanding of intentional action. Developmental Psychology, 41, 328–337. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.41.2.328
9.
Boyd, R., & Richerson, P.J. (1992). Punishment allows the evolution of cooperation (or anything else) in sizable groups. Ethology and Sociobiology, 13, 171–195. doi: 10.1016/0162-3095(92)90032-Y
10.
Bull, J.J., & Rice, W.R. (1991). Distinguishing mechanisms for the evolution of co-operation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 149, 63–74. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5193(05)80072-4
11.
Buon, M., Jacob, P., Margules, S., Brunet, I., Dutat, M., Cabrol, D., & Dupoux, E. (2014). Friend or foe? Early social evaluation of human interactions. PLoS One, 9, e88612.
12.
Burns, M.P., & Sommerville, J.A. (2014). “I pick you”: The impact of fairness and race on infants’ selection of social partners. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 3. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00093
13.
Chae, J.J.K., & Song, J. (2018). Negativity bias in infants’ expectations about agents’ dispositions. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, online edition before print.
14.
Chan, W. (1963). A source book in Chinese philosophy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15.
Choi, Y., & Luo, Y. (2015). 13-month-olds’ understanding of social interactions. Psychological Science, 26, 274–283. doi: 10.1177/0956797614562452
16.
Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 163–228). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
17.
Cowell, J.M., Calma-Birling, D., & Decety, J. (2018). Domain-general neural computations underlying prosociality during infancy and early childhood. Current Opinion in Psychology, 20, 66–71. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.016
18.
Cowell, J., & Decety, J. (2015). Precursors to morality in development as a complex interplay between neural, socioenvironmental, and behavioral facets. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 12657–12662. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1508832112
19.
Cushman, F. (2008). Crime and punishment: distinguishing the roles of causal and intentional analyses in moral judgment. Cognition, 108, 353–380. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.03.006
20.
Cushman, F., Sheketoff, R., Wharton, S., & Carey, S. (2013). The development of intent-based moral judgment. Cognition, 127, 6–21. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.008
21.
Dahl, A. (2016a). Mothers’ insistence when prohibiting infants from harming others in everyday interactions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1448. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01448
22.
Dahl, A. (2016b). Infants’ unprovoked acts of force toward others. Developmental Science, 19, 1049–1057. doi: 10.1111/desc.12342
23.
Dahl, A. & Campos, J.J. (2013). Domain difference in early social interactions. Child Development, 84, 817–825. Doi: 10.1111/cdev.12002
24.
Dahl, A., Schuck, R.K., & Campos, J.J. (2013). Do young toddlers act on their social preferences? Developmental Psychology, 49, 1964–1970. doi: 10.1037/a0031460
25.
Dahl, A., Waltzer, T., & Gross, R.L. (2018). Helping, hitting and developing: Toward a constructivist-interactionist account of early morality. In C.C. Helwig (Ed.), New perspectives on moral development (pp. 33–54). New York, NY: Routledge.
26.
Decety, J., Michalska, K.J., & Kinzler, K.D. (2012). The contribution of emotion and cognition to moral sensitivity: A neurodevelopmental study. Cerebral Cortex, 22, 209–220. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr111
27.
Fawcett, C., & Liszkowski, U. (2012). Infants anticipate others’ social preferences. Infant and Child Development, 21, 239–249. doi: 10.1002/icd.739
28.
Geraci, A., & Surian, L. (2011). The developmental roots of fairness: Infants’ reactions to equal and unequal distributions of resources. Developmental Science, 14, 1012–1020. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687. 2011.01048.x
29.
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S.P., & Ditto, P.H. (2013). Moral foundation theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 55–130. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4
30.
Gray, K., Young, L., & Waytz, A. (2012). Mind perception is the essence of morality. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 101–124. doi: 10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387
31.
Gredebäck, C., Kaduk, K., Bakker, M., Gottwald, J., Ekberg, T., Elsner, C., Reid, V., & Kenward, B. (2015). The neuropsychology of infants’ pro-social preferences. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 106–113. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2015.01.006
32.
Greene, J.D., Sommerville, R.B., Nystrom, L.E., Darley, J.M., & Cohen, J.D. (2001). An fMRI investigation of emotional engagement in moral judgment. Science, 293, 2105–2108. doi: 10.1126/science.1062872
33.
Grusec, J.E., & Goodnow, J.J. (1994) Impact of parental discipline methods on the child’s internalization of values: A reconceptualization of current points of view. Developmental Psychology, 30, 4–19. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.30.1.4
34.
Gürerk, O., Irlenbusch, B., & Rockenbach, B. (2006). The competitive advantage of sanctioning institutions. Science, 312, 108–111. doi: 10.1126/science.1123633
35.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.4.814
36.
Hamlin, J.K. (2013). Failed attempts to help and harm: Intention versus outcome in preverbal infants’ social evaluations. Cognition, 128, 451–474. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.04.004
37.
Hamlin, J.K. (2014). Context-dependent social evaluation in 4.5-month-old human infants: The role of domain-general versus domain-specific processes in the development of evaluation. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 614. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00614
38.
Hamlin, J.K. (2015). The case for social evaluation in preverbal infants: Gazing toward one’s goal drives infants’ preferences for helpers over hinderers in the hill paradigm. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1563. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01563
39.
Hamlin, J.K., Ullman, T., Tenenbaum, J., Goodman, N., & Baker, C. (2013). The mentalistic basis of core social cognition: experiments in preverbal infants and a computational model. Developmental Science, 16, 209–226. doi: 10.1111/desc.12017
40.
Hamlin, J.K., & Wynn, K. (2011). Young infants prefer prosocial to antisocial others. Cognitive Development, 26, 30–39. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2010.09.001
41.
Hamlin, J.K., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2007). Social evaluation by preverbal infants. Nature, 450, 557–559. doi: 10.1038/nature06288
42.
Hamlin, J.K., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2010). Three-month-olds show a negativity bias in their social evaluations. Developmental Science, 13, 923–929. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00951.x
43.
Hamlin, J.K., Wynn, K., Bloom, P., & Mahajan, N. (2011). How infants and toddlers react to antisocial others. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108, 19931–19936. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1110306108
44.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, NY: Wiley. doi: 10.1037/10628-000
45.
Helwig, C.C. (2008). The moral judgment of the child reevaluated: Heteronomy, early morality, and reasoning about social justice and inequalities. In C. Wainryb, J. G. Smetana, & E. Turiel (Eds.), Social development, social inequalities, and social justice (pp. 27–51). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
46.
Henrich, J., McElreath, R., Barr, A., Ensminger, J., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., Ziker, J. (2006). Costly punishment across human societies. Science, 312, 1767–1770. doi: 10.1126/science.1127333
47.
Hume, D. (1739/1969). A treatise of human nature. Harmondsworth: Penguin Press.
48.
Isik, L., Koldewyn, K., Beeler, D., & Kanwisher, N. (2017). Perceiving social interactions in the posterior superior temporal sulcus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114, 9145–9152. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1714471114
49.
Kant, I. (1785/1993). Grounding for the metaphysics of morals. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
50.
Kohlberg, L. (1984). Essays on moral development. Vol. 2. The psychology of moral development. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.
51.
Kochanska, G., & Aksan, N. (2006) Children’s conscience and self-regulation. Journal of Personality, 74, 1587–1617. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00421.x
52.
Kuhlmeier, V., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2003). Attribution of dispositional states by 12-month-olds. Psychological Science, 14, 402–408. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.01454
53.
Landy, J.F., & Goodwin, G.P. (2015). Does incidental disgust amplify moral judgment? A meta-analytic review of experimental evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 518–536. doi: 10.1177/ 1745691615583128
54.
Lee, Y., Yun, J., Kim, E., & Song, H. (2015). The development of infants’ sensitivity to behavioral intentions when inferring others’ social preferences. PLoS One, 10, e0135588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135588
55.
Lerner, J.S., Goldberg, J.H., & Tetlock, P.E. (1998). Sober second thought: The effects of accountability, anger, and authoritarianism on attributions of responsibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 563–574. doi: 10.1177/0146167298246001
56.
Lucca, K., Pospisil, J., & Sommerville, J.A. (2018). Fairness informs social decision making in infancy. PLoS One, 13, e0192848. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192848
57.
Malle, B.F., & Knobe, J. (1997). The folk concept of intentionality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 101–121. doi: 10.1006/jesp.1996.1314
58.
Margoni, F., & Surian, L. (2017). Children’s intention-based moral judgments of helping agents. Cognitive Development, 41, 46–64. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2016.12.001
59.
Margoni, F., & Surian, L. (2018). Infants’ evaluation of prosocial and antisocial agents: A meta-analysis. Developmental Psychology, 54, 1445–1455.
60.
Maurer, M. (1999). Why are tough on crime policies so popular? Stanford Law & Policy Review, 11, 9–22.
61.
McDonnell, P.M. (1975). The development of visually guided reaching. Perception & Psychophysics, 18, 181–185. doi: 10.3758/BF03205963
62.
Meristo, M., Strid, K., & Surian, L. (2016). Preverbal infants’ ability to encode the outcome of distributive actions. Infancy, 21, 353–372. doi: 10.1111/infa.12124
63.
Meristo, M., & Surian, L. (2013). Do infants detect indirect reciprocity? Cognition, 129, 102–113. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.06.006
64.
Meristo, M., & Surian, L. (2014). Infants distinguish antisocial actions directed towards fair and unfair agents. PLoS One, 9, e110553. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110553
65.
Mikhail, J. (2011). Elements of moral cognition: Rawl’s linguistic analogy and the cognitive science of moral and legal judgment. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511780578
66.
Monroe, A.E., & Malle, B.F. (2017). Two paths to blame: Intentionality directs moral information pro-cessing along two distinct tracks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146, 123–133. doi: 10.1037/xge0000234
67.
Nobes, G., Panagiotaki, G., & Pawson, C. (2009). The influence of negligence, intention, and outcome on children’s moral judgments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104, 382–397. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2009.08.001
68.
Nucci, L.P., & Gingo, M. (2010). The development of moral reasoning. In U. Goswami (Ed.), Handbook of child cognitive development (2nd ed., pp. 420–445). UK: Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444325485.ch16
69.
Nucci, L.P., & Turiel, E. (1978). Social interactions and the development of social concepts in preschool children. Child Development, 49, 400–407.
70.
Nuñez, N., Laurent, S.M., & Gray, J.M. (2014). Is negligence a first cousin to intentionality? Lay conceptions of negligence and its relationship to intentionality. Applied Cognition Psychology, 28, 55–65. doi: 10.1002/acp.2957
71.
O’Gorman, R., Henrich, J., & Van Vugt, M. (2009). Constraining free riding in public goods games: designated solitary punishers can sustain human cooperation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 276, 323–329. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2008.1082
72.
Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child. New York, NY: Free Press.
73.
Plato (380 BC). Meno (B. Jowett, Trans.). http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/meno.html.
74.
Premack, D. & Premack, A.J. (1997). Infants attribute value ± to the goal-directed actions of self-propelled objects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 848–856. doi: 10.1162/jocn.1997.9.6.848
75.
Price, M.E., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2002). Punitive sentiment as an anti-free rider psychological device. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 203–231. doi: 10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00093-9
76.
Roberts, G. (1998). Competitive altruism: From reciprocity to the handicap principle. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, 427–431. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0312
77.
Robinson, P.H., Kurzban, R., & Jones, O.D. (2007). Origins of shared intuitions of justice. Vanderbilt Law Review, 60, 1633–1688.
78.
Rottman, J., & Kelemen, D. (2012). Aliens behaving badly: Children’s acquisition of novel purity-based morals. Cognition, 124, 356–360. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.001
79.
Rottman, J., Young, L., & Kelemen, D. (2017). The impact of testimony on children’s moralization of novel actions. Emotion, 17, 811–827. doi: 10.1037/emo0000276
80.
Salvadori, E., Blazsekova, T., Volein, A., Karap, Z., Tatone, D., Mascaro, O., & Csibra, G. (2015). Probing the strength of infants’ preference for helpers over hinderers: Two replication attempts of Hamlin and Wynn (2011). PLoS One, 10, e0140570. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140570
81.
Sanfey, A.G., Rilling, J.K., Aronson, J.A., Nystrom, L.E., & Cohen, J.D. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science, 300, 1755–1758. doi: 10.1126/science. 1082976
82.
Scarf, D., Imuta, K., Colombo, M., & Hayne, H. (2012). Social evaluation or simple association? Simple associations may explain moral reasoning in infants. PLoS One, 7, e42698. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042698
83.
Schmidt, M.F.H., & Sommerville, J.A. (2011). Fairness expectation and altruistic sharing in 15-month-old human infants. PLoS One, 6, e23223. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023223
84.
Schnall, S., Haidt, J., Clore, G.L., & Jordan, A.H. (2008). Disgust as embodied moral judgment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1096–1109. doi: 10.1177/0146167208317771
85.
Scola, C., Holvoet, C., Arciszewski, T., & Picard, D. (2015). Further evidence for infants’ preference for prosocial over antisocial behaviors. Infancy, 20, 684–692. doi: 10.1111/infa.12095
86.
Sloane, S., Baillargeon, R., & Premack, D. (2012). Do infants have a sense of fairness? Psychological Science, 23, 196–204. doi: 10.1177/0956797611422072
87.
Smetana, J.G. (1984). Toddlers’ social interactions regarding moral and social transgressions. Child Development, 55, 1767–1776. doi: 10.2307/1129924
88.
Smetana, J.G. (1989). Toddlers’ social interactions in the context of moral and conventional transgressions in the home. Developmental Psychology, 25, 499–508. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.25.4.499
89.
Smetana, J.G. (2006). Social-cognitive domain theory: Consistencies and variations in children’s moral and social judgments. In M. Killen & J.G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (pp. 119–153). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
90.
Smetana, J.G., Jambon, M., & Ball, C. (2014). The social domain approach to children’s moral and social judgments. In M. Killen & J.G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (2nd ed., pp. 23–45). New York, NY: Psychology Press. doi: 10.4324/9780203581957.ch2
91.
Sommerville, J.A., Schmidt, M.F., Yun, J., & Burns, M. (2013). The development of fairness expectations and prosocial behavior in the second year of life. Infancy, 18, 40–66. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7078. 2012.00129.x
92.
Stahl, A.E., & Feigenson, L. (2015). Cognitive development. Observing the unexpected enhances infants’ learning and exploration. Science, 348, 91–94. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa3799
93.
Steckler, C., Liberman, Z., Van de Vondervoort, J.W., Slevinsky, J., & Hamlin, J.K. (2018). Feeling out a link between feeling and infant sociomoral evaluation. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, Epub ahead of print.
94.
Surian, L., & Franchin, L. (2017). Infants reason about deserving agents: A test with distributive actions. Cognitive Development, 44, 49–56. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2017.08.009
95.
Taber-Thomas, B.C., Asp, E.W., Koenigs, M., Sutterer, M., Anderson, S.W., & Tranel, D. (2014). Arrested development: Early prefrontal lesions impair the maturation of moral judgment. Brain, 137, 1254–1261
96.
Tan, E., Mikami, A.Y., & Hamlin, J.K. (2018). Do infant sociomoral evaluation and action studies predict preschool social and behavioral adjustment? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 176, 39–54.
97.
Tasimi, A., & Wynn, K. (2016). Costly rejection of wrongdoers by infants and children. Cognition, 151, 76–79. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.03.004
98.
Turiel, E. (2006). The development of morality. In W. Damon, N. Eisenberg, & R.M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (6th ed., pp. 789–857). New York, NY: Wiley.
99.
Turiel, E. (2014). Morality: Epistemology, development, and social opposition. In M. Killen & J.G. Smetana (Eds.), Handbook of moral development (2nd ed., pp. 3–22). New York, NY: Psychology Press. doi: 10.4324/9780203581957.ch1
100.
Vaish, A., Carpenter, M., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Sympathy through affective perspective taking and its relation to prosocial behavior in toddlers. Developmental Psychology, 45, 534–543. doi: 10.1037/a0014322
101.
Van de Vondervoort, J.W., Aknin, L.B., Kushnir, T., Slevinsky, J., & Hamlin, J.K. (2018). Selectivity in toddlers’ behavioral and emotional reactions to prosocial and antisocial others. Developmental Psychology, 54, 1–14. doi: 10.1037/dev0000404
102.
Van de Vondervoort, J.W., & Hamlin, J.K. (2017). Preschoolers’ social and moral judgments of third-party helpers and hinderers align with infants’ social evaluations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 164, 136–151. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2017.07.004
103.
Woo, B.M., Steckler, C.M., Le, D.T., & Hamlin, J.K. (2017). Social evaluation of intentional, truly accidental, and negligently accidental helpers and harmers by 10-month-old infants. Cognition, 168, 154–163. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.06.029
104.
Young, L., & Dungan, J. (2012). Where in the brain is morality? Everywhere and maybe nowhere. Social Neuroscience, 7, 1–10. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2011.569146
105.
Young, L., & Saxe, R. (2011). When ignorance is no excuse: Different roles for intent across moral domains. Cognition, 120, 202–214. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.04.005
106.
Zelazo, P.D., Helwig, C.C., & Lau, A. (1996). Intention, act, and outcome in behavioral prediction and moral judgment. Child Development, 67, 2478–2492. doi: 10.2307/1131635
107.
Ziv, T., & Sommerville, J. (2017). Developmental differences in infants’ fairness expectations from 6 to 15 months of age. Child Development, 88, 1930–1951. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12674
© 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
2018
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.