Children’s endorsement of prosocial lies according to content and recipient knowledge

Children and adults use prosocial lies in their everyday conversational exchanges. However, their use of this language form varies across contexts. Extending work demonstrating the importance of conversational partner knowledge for communicative decisions, we examine whether children (ages 8-11 years old; <i>N</i> = 81) and adults' (<i>N</i> = 218) endorsement of prosocial lies (and truths) differ based on whether a recipient is/is not knowledgeable of the context. Additionally, we examine whether such endorsements varied based on whether the lie (or truth) was about their opinion or the objective reality. Participants were asked to imagine themselves within a scenario with another person who was unaware/aware of a negative event. They then rated how likely they would be to use truth/lie statements which varied in content (i.e., reference to opinion or reality). While children endorsed statements similarly for ignorant/knowledgeable recipients, adults were more likely to endorse telling a prosocial lie when the recipient was ignorant of the negative event. Both groups indicated higher likelihood of telling a prosocial lie about an opinion versus reality. Addressing individual factors, self-reported empathy was not associated with children's responses but was associated with adults' communicative choices. Together this work provides information as to how children (and adults) use varying language forms to navigate social situations.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
First Language
Published
2025-07-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/01427237251348529
Primary Topic
Child and Animal Learning Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Children’s endorsement of prosocial lies according to content and recipient knowledge

Elizabeth S. Nilsen, Shirley Ong
First Language
Child and Animal Learning Development
article

Children’s endorsement of prosocial lies according to content and recipient knowledge

Elizabeth S. Nilsen, Shirley Ong
article en

Abstract

Children and adults use prosocial lies in their everyday conversational exchanges. However, their use of this language form varies across contexts. Extending work demonstrating the importance of conversational partner knowledge for communicative decisions, we examine whether children (ages 8-11 years old; <i>N</i> = 81) and adults' (<i>N</i> = 218) endorsement of prosocial lies (and truths) differ based on whether a recipient is/is not knowledgeable of the context. Additionally, we examine whether such endorsements varied based on whether the lie (or truth) was about their opinion or the objective reality. Participants were asked to imagine themselves within a scenario with another person who was unaware/aware of a negative event. They then rated how likely they would be to use truth/lie statements which varied in content (i.e., reference to opinion or reality). While children endorsed statements similarly for ignorant/knowledgeable recipients, adults were more likely to endorse telling a prosocial lie when the recipient was ignorant of the negative event. Both groups indicated higher likelihood of telling a prosocial lie about an opinion versus reality. Addressing individual factors, self-reported empathy was not associated with children's responses but was associated with adults' communicative choices. Together this work provides information as to how children (and adults) use varying language forms to navigate social situations.

First LanguageVol. 46(1)
University of Waterloo (CA)
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Child and Animal Learning Development
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.