did emerge showed that children were more generous with the self in Study 2—allocating more rewarding jobs or fewer aversive jobs—than they were with fictional students in Study 1. The group showed the largest number of cross-study differences that favored the self, but their allocations in Study 2 were firmly equality-focused and did not indicate a desire to hoard rewarding jobs and avoid aversive jobs. The 6–7-year-olds did not make allocations that, relative to Study 1, favored the self. Although there were a small number of cross-study differences in the group, these children showed a preference for equity in Study 2 that was similar to that seen in Study 1. Children's judgments about the fairness of an authority figure's allocations of rewards and punishments, made in the context of the Self Good and Self Bad conditions, did not differ from those observed in Study 1. In analyses that focused on differences in Study 2 only (i.e., not cross-study differences), there were no effects of condition where Self Good vs. Self Bad was concerned. The intrastudy differences that did emerge were between the 4–5- and 8–10-year-olds, wherein the youngest group was firmly equality-focused and the oldest group was firmly equity-focused. These differences replicate the main findings from Study 1. As noted in the discussion section for the main study (referred to as Study 1 here), an important next step in this line of research will be to assess how children and adults prefer to allocate rewards and punishments when the self truly stands to benefit or suffer. The lower-stakes hypothetical scenarios used here do not allow for confident conclusions to be drawn about behavioral differences in first- vs. third-party distributive and retributive justice tasks. One intriguing finding in Study 2 involves the responses of the 6–7-year-old group in the Allocation Phase of the study. Where there were differences across the first- and third-party tasks in this age group, the children were more generous to the other children in the third-party context than they were to themselves in Study 2's first-party Self Good condition. There is no readily available
did emerge showed that children were more generous with the self in Study 2—allocating more rewarding jobs or fewer aversive jobs—than they were with fictional students in Study 1. The group showed the largest number of cross-study differences that favored the self, but their allocations in Study 2 were firmly equality-focused and did not indicate a desire to hoard rewarding jobs and avoid aversive jobs. The 6–7-year-olds did not make allocations that, relative to Study 1, favored the self. Although there were a small number of cross-study differences in the group, these children showed a preference for equity in Study 2 that was similar to that seen in Study 1. Children's judgments about the fairness of an authority figure's allocations of rewards and punishments, made in the context of the Self Good and Self Bad conditions, did not differ from those observed in Study 1. In analyses that focused on differences in Study 2 only (i.e., not cross-study differences), there were no effects of condition where Self Good vs. Self Bad was concerned. The intrastudy differences that did emerge were between the 4–5- and 8–10-year-olds, wherein the youngest group was firmly equality-focused and the oldest group was firmly equity-focused. These differences replicate the main findings from Study 1. As noted in the discussion section for the main study (referred to as Study 1 here), an important next step in this line of research will be to assess how children and adults prefer to allocate rewards and punishments when the self truly stands to benefit or suffer. The lower-stakes hypothetical scenarios used here do not allow for confident conclusions to be drawn about behavioral differences in first- vs. third-party distributive and retributive justice tasks. One intriguing finding in Study 2 involves the responses of the 6–7-year-old group in the Allocation Phase of the study. Where there were differences across the first- and third-party tasks in this age group, the children were more generous to the other children in the third-party context than they were to themselves in Study 2's first-party Self Good condition. There is no readily available
z2p003163633so1.docx