Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36439067›Full record

ArticleOpen mind : discoveries in cognitive science2022

Intuitive Sociology: Children Recognize Decision-Making Structures and Prefer Groups With Less-Concentrated Power.

Ashley J Thomas, Vivian Mitchell, Emily Sumner, Brandon F Terrizzi, Paul K Piff, Barbara W Sarnecka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Agenda Setting andOpen mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ashley J ThomasBrain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1239-883X
Vivian MitchellDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine.
Emily SumnerCognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1912-9640
Brandon F TerrizziDivision of General and Community Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0107-4231
Paul K PiffDepartment of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8719-7824
Barbara W SarneckaCognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2432-3712

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From an early age, children recognize that people belong to social groups. However, not all groups are structured in the same way. The current study asked whether children recognize and distinguish among different decision-making structures. If so, do they prefer some decision-making structures over others? In these studies, children were told stories about two groups that went camping. In the hierarchical group, one character made all the decisions; in the egalitarian group, each group member made one decision. Without being given explicit information about the group's structures, 6- to 8-year-old children, but not 4- and 5-year-old children, recognized that the two groups had different decision-making structures and preferred to interact with the group where decision-making was shared. Children also inferred that a new member of the egalitarian group would be more generous than a new member of the hierarchical group. Thus, from an early age, children's social reasoning includes the ability to compare social structures, which may be foundational for later complex political and moral reasoning.

Indexed as

participatory decision-makingsocial developmentsocial hierarchysocial reasoning

Identifiers

PMID36439067
PMCPMC9692051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.