Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Aug 24.
Published in final edited form as: Cognition. 2011 Mar 4;119(2):197–215. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.01.006

Table 1.

Justifications for the Evaluations of the Act by Age

Harm Negligence No Negative Intent
Participant Age (in years) MoToM Prototypic Moral MoToM Prototypic Moral MoToM Prototypic Moral
3 .51 (.06) .44 (.06) .02 (.04) .01 (.01) .13 (.05) .02 (.02)
5 .40 (.06) .57 (.06) .14 (.04) .01 (.01) .21 (.05) .03 (.02)
7 .30 (.08) .88 (.07) .18 (.05) .00 (.01) .41 (.06) .00 (.02)

Note: Harm = Participants’ justifications that referred to harm to the victim; Negligence = Participants’ justifications that referred to the lack of effort to avoid transgression; No Negative Intent = Participants’ justifications that referred to the lack of negative intentions on the part of the transgressor. Numbers reflect the proportion of participants justifying their judgment with the respective codes. Standard Deviations are in parentheses.