Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36692288›Full record

ArticleChild development2023

Five-year-old children value reasons in apologies for belief-based accidents.

Owen Waddington, Marina Proft, Keith Jensen, Bahar Köymen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Child development, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Why do children and adults believe others apologize?The British journal of developmental psychology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Owen WaddingtonDivision of Psychology, Communication and Human Neuroscience, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8678-8086
Marina ProftGeorg-Elias-Müller-Institute for Psychology, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Keith JensenDivision of Psychology, Communication and Human Neuroscience, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Bahar KöymenDivision of Psychology, Communication and Human Neuroscience, School of Health Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5126-8240

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accidents can be intent-based (unintended action-unintended outcome) or belief-based (intended action-unintended outcome). As compared to intent-based accidents, giving reasons is more crucial for belief-based accidents because the transgressor appears to have intentionally transgressed. In Study 1, UK-based preschoolers who were native English speakers (N = 96, 53 girls, collected 2020-2021) witnessed two intent-based or belief-based accidents; one transgressor apologized, the other apologized with a reason. Five-year-olds, but not 4-year-olds, favored the reason-giving transgressor following a belief-based accident but not an intent-based accident (where an apology sufficed). In Study 2, 5-year-olds (N = 48, 25 girls, collected 2021) distinguished between "good" and "bad" reasons for the harm caused. Thus, 5-year-old children recognize when reasons should accompany apologies and account for the quality of these reasons.

Indexed as

AccidentsIntentionChild, PreschoolFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID36692288
PMCPMC10952182

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.