Evaluations of Others' Decisions by Intellectually Gifted and Average Children

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of decentering prompts on the tendency for intellectually gifted and average children to base their evaluations of an individual upon the negative consequences of the individual's behavior. Eighty gifted and average children, ages 7-10, were read scenarios in which a child makes a seemingly reasonable decision that produced mild, severe, or no consequences. Half of the subjects were prompted to think about what the child in the story knew at the time the decision was made, whereas the others were not. When they were not prompted to decenter, both gifted and average children evaluated the child more negatively when they thought negative consequences had resulted from his or her behavior, replicating previous research. When they were prompted, gifted subjects disregarded consequence information when making their judgments, whereas average children continued to base their evaluations on behavioral consequences.