The Role of Empathy and Motivational Context on Children’s Prosocial Lying and Responding
Référence bibliographique 
Nagar, Pooja. 2017. «The Role of Empathy and Motivational Context on Children’s Prosocial Lying and Responding». Mémoire de maîtrise, Montréal, Université McGill, Département d’éducation et de psychologie du counseling.
Intentions : «The current study aimed to examine the role of parent-reported empathy on children’s tendencies to tell a prosocial lie across development and varying reward conditions (High Cost, Low Cost, No Reward).» (p. 4)
Questions/Hypothèses : «It was predicted that overall, the rate of prosocial lie-telling would increase with age (Hypothesis1), and children would be more likely to lie in the Low Cost and No Reward Conditions in comparison to the High Cost Condition (Hypothesis2). […] Additionally, […] it was predicted that children whose prosocial moral reasoning reflects ‘needs-oriented reasoning’ would be more likely to engage in prosocial actions (i.e., share the last star or tell a prosocial lie; Hypothesis3 and Hypothesis4). Further, […] it was expected that children with higher total scores on the parent-reported empathy measure would more likely be prosocial responders (Hypothesis5) and prosocial liars (Hypothesis6), compared to those who score lower on the parent-reported empathy measure. Finally, given the importance of perspective taking in both lie-telling […] and empathy […], it was hypothesized that those children who lie in the High Cost condition (i.e., altruistic liars) should score higher on the cognitive component of the GEM [Griffith Empathy Measure] (Hypothesis7).» (p. 27-28)
Échantillon/Matériau : L’échantillon est composé de 120 enfants montréalais âgés de 7 à 11 ans.
Instruments : Grille d’observation
Type de traitement des données : Analyse statistique
«Results indicated that overall 40.0% of children lied for the confederate, however 64.2% of children offered the final star to the confederate even if they did not lie. Age in Months and Reward Condition did not predict children’s tendency to lie, however the Age and Reward interaction showed that older children were more likely to lie in the Low Cost condition than in the High Cost. Furthermore, Age in Months predicted children’s tendency to share their last star, regardless of the Reward Condition the child was in, with children being more likely to share with age. Finally, children who exhibited higher cognitive empathy were more likely to lie for and share with the confederate. These results will help us better understand how deception interplays with children’s prosociality, and how children’s prosocial decision-making changes with age and in situations that jeopardize one’s own wellbeing.» (p. 4)