1. Objectifs

Intentions :
«The goal of this study [is] to investigate the various strategies that mothers and their 6-7 year-old children employ to make blame attributions when engaged in conversations about two peer conflicts in which the child was the victim of harm – one to which the child felt they contributed (shared fault) and the other to which they felt they did not contribute to the fight (no fault).» (p. 38)

2. Méthode

Échantillon/Matériau :
«Data were collected as part of a larger study examining peer conflict[.] The total sample included 36 mother-child dyads [residing in and around Montreal]; 50% of children were girls.» (p. 21)

Instruments :
- Questionnaire
- Guide d’entretien semi-directif

Type de traitement des données :
Analyse statistique
Analyse de contenu

3. Résumé

«Results revealed that families maximized responsibility more in the no fault conversations in the context of harm to the child and self-protection from harm, whereas they maximized blame concerning the child’s harm to his/her peer more in the shared fault conversations. Comparing mothers and children, findings indicated that mothers maximized blame more in self-protection contexts, whereas children maximized blame for the peers’ harm to child and mitigated responsibility across all contexts. Regarding dimensions of blame attribution, avoidability and consequences of harm were used most often by families. Mothers referenced avoidability and act evaluations most frequently whereas children more often discussed presence of harmful acts and subsequent responses to one’s own harm. Findings suggest that maternal socialization of blame is context-sensitive as mother-child dyads are listening to and largely agreeing with each other. Mothers’ emphasis on self-protection raises questions about parental concerns for children’s responsibility and agency in the context of victimization.» (p. iii)