Preschoolers’ responses to prosocial opportunities during naturalistic interactions with peers: A cross‐cultural comparison
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The goal of this study was to better understand similarities and differences in preschool children's expression of needs and prosocial responsiveness to peers’ needs across two culturally distinct contexts. Preschoolers were observed in a semi‐naturalistic design across rural Mexico and urban Canada, wherein they were instructed to build a tower with blocks. Three‐ to 6‐year‐olds ( N = 306; 48% female) were divided into 64 peer groups. We coded for children's expression of needs (instrumental, material, or emotional), responses to prosocial opportunities (prosociality, denial, or no response), prosociality without an apparent need (spontaneous prosociality), and types of prosocial behavior (helping, sharing, or comforting). While instrumental and material needs were expressed similarly across both samples, Tzotzil Maya children expressed fewer emotional needs than Canadian children. Failing to respond to others’ needs, followed by denial, were the most frequent need‐provoked response in both countries; surprisingly, only 9% of needs received a prosocial response. Though need‐provoked prosociality was rare in both cultural contexts, children engaged in considerable spontaneous prosociality which varied as a function of age, gender, and cultural context. Lastly, Canadian more than Tzotzil Maya children denied emotional and instrumental needs (but not material needs). The findings inform how cultural practices may shape the presentation of needs and prosocial responsiveness in peer interactions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it