Golden Rule or valence matching? Methodological problems in Hamlin et al

Article (PDF Available)inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109(22):E1426; author reply E1427 · April 2012with33 Reads
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1204123109 · Source: PubMed

Full-text (PDF)

Available from: Damian Scarf
    • "Experiment 2 was run concurrently with Experiment 1, and was designed to provide a more stringent test of the role of both bouncing and uphill gaze in driving infants' preference for Helpers in the hill paradigm. New stimuli were created by filming puppet shows performed on a wooden hill apparatus identical to the foam core apparatus utilized by Hamlin et al. (2007) and Scarf et al. (2012b) (but note that the hill itself was somewhat lighter in color). In the No Bounce condition, the Climber's gaze was fixed uphill, but he did not bounce upon reaching the top of the hill during Helper events, nor did he roll end-over-end to the bottom of the hill during Hinderer events. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: In a 2007 empirical report, Hamlin, Wynn, and Bloom provided the first evidence that preverbal infants at 6 and at 10 months of age evaluate others on the basis of their helpful and unhelpful actions toward unknown third parties. In their “hill paradigm,” a Climber puppet tried but failed to climb a steep hill, and was alternately bumped up the hill by the Helper and bumped down the hill by the Hinderer. After being habituated to these events, both 10- and 6-month-olds selectively reached for the Helper over the Hinderer. In response, Scarf, Imuta, Colombo, & Hayne (2012b) provided evidence that rather than reflecting an early developing capacity for social evaluation, infants’ choices in Hamlin et al. reflected low-level perceptual preferences whereby infants are drawn to any character who is associated with the Climber bouncing. The current studies represent an attempt to adjudicate between the social and perceptual accounts of infants’ preferences for Helpers over Hinderers in the hill paradigm, by pitting a perceptual cue (e.g., bouncing) against a social cue (e.g., whether or not the Climber gazes toward his goal). Infants’ patterns of preference across 2 experiments support the social account.
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2015
    • "Both authors of this commentary received their PhD training in basic behavioral (animal cognition) research. We both continue to conduct animal cognition studies, but one of us (MC) has embarked on a neuroscience career while the other (DS) has gone on to tackle topics from moral nativism (Scarf et al., 2012a,b) to alcohol consumption in university students (Riordan et al., 2015a,b). "
    Full-text · Article · Nov 2015
    • "Indeed, some studies show that very young infants already have sophisticated cooperative skills (e.g. Hamlin et al., 2007 Hamlin et al., , 2010), but a more parsimonious interpretation of these studies is also possible (e.g. Scarf et al., 2012a, b). In line with this, the majority of studies provide empirical support to a later emergence of complex cooperative skills, so that more research is yet needed to support Hamlin's (2012) and Wynn's (2008) claims. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Humans have attained an unparalleled level of sophistication when engaging in collaborative and cooperative activities. Remarkably, the skills and motivation to engage in complex forms of collaboration and cooperation seem to emerge early on during infancy and childhood. In this paper, I extensively review the literature on the evolution and development of human cooperation, emphasizing important aspects of inter-cultural variation in collaborative and cooperative behaviour. This will not only allow us to confront the different evolutionary scenarios in which cooperation may have emerged, but will especially provide the reader with a first orientation in the abundant literature on human cooperation.
    Article · Jan 2015
Show more