If she watches, I will share: The impact of private and public self-focus on children’s sharing behavior and the moral self-concept
Bibliographic record
Abstract
States with a focus on oneself, such as observing oneself (private self-focus) and being observed by others (public self-focus), are proposed to increase the saliency of own motives and evaluations by others and thereby to influence behavior. These processes become particularly relevant toward the end of early childhood, around the same age when children's moral self-concept (their view of themselves as prosocial agents) consolidates. This study advances the understanding of the role of self-focus on children's prosocial behavior by considering their moral self-concept. We investigated how private self-focus and two facets of public self-focus affect sharing behavior, the moral self-concept, and their interrelation. In a preregistered study, we assessed 5- to 8-year-olds' (N = 161, 84 female) sharing behavior and moral self-concept across four conditions. Children shared while observing themselves (private self-focus), while being observed by another child (reputation), while being observed by another child who could reciprocate later (reciprocity), or while not being observed (control). Generally, children shared more when observed by another person compared to when they were not in the focus of anybody, whereas observing themselves did not increase sharing. Children's moral self-concept was positively correlated with sharing, particularly when being in public self-focus, while mean values did not differ between conditions. The study provides novel evidence for the specific role of the awareness of others' evaluation in children's prosocial behavior. It suggests a social grounding of the moral self-concept by revealing its particular role for sharing behavior when being in the focus of social attention.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".