Contributions of parents and peers to children's moral socialization

This article is concerned with the process of moral development, or specifically, how children acquire a sense of right and wrong from their interactions with two major agents of socialization—parents and peers. The first section of the paper critically examines the literature on parental influences and draws several conclusions about the ways in which parents affect children's moral character. The focus then shifts to a review of the literature on peer group contributions to moral socialization. The paper concludes by examining the literature on cross-pressures, and offering a perspective on the ways in which parental and peer group influences combine to affect children's moral development.     

Literal meaning and psychological theory

This paper evaluates the psychological status of literal meaning. Most linguistic and philosophical theories assume that sentences have well-specified literal meanings which represent the meaning of a sentence independent of context. Recent debate on this issue has centered on whether literal meaning can be equated with context-free meaning, or whether a sentence's literal meaning is determined only given a set of background assumptions. Neither of these positions meet the demands of a psychological theory of language understanding. Sentences do not have well-defined literal meanings, regardless of whether these are determined in light of a set of background assumptions. Moreover, the putative literal meanings of sentences do not contribute in systematic ways toward the understanding of speakers' utterance meanings. These observations suggest that the distinctions between literal and metaphoric meanings, and between semantics and pragmatics, have little psychological validity.     

Shareability: The social psychology of epistemology

Psychologists and cognitive scientists interested in the nature of internal representations of human knowledge often use observable regularities or structures to infer what the innate constraints on those representations must be like. It is possible, however, that certain structures might come about only when a group of people share a knowledge domain. Furthermore, it is possible that there are analyzable constraints on knowledge structures that emerge when knowledge is being shared. Such constraints are referred to in this paper as “shareability” constraints. A number of examples of observable structures in human knowledge are discussed in terms of shareability constraints. An attempt is made to determine which sorts of structures are most shareable, and how those structures may differ from the sorts of structures that are easily represented by the individual mind but not easily shared between minds.     

Handedness patterns in deaf persons

The handedness patterns of 226 deaf high-school and college students were compared to those of 210 college students with normal hearing. Both groups evidenced many more right-handed than left-handed members, as determined by responses to a hand preference questionnaire and performance on an activity test battery. There was, however, a significantly higher incidence of left-handedness among the deaf subjects than among the hearing. Moreover, the left-handed deaf students were found to be less likely to have deaf relatives, and to have been introduced to sign language later in their development than the deaf student population as a whole. These findings were interpreted as showing that age of acquisition of language was related to the development of handedness patterns, whereas auditory processing experience probably was not.     

Social class differences in sociodramatic play: A critical review

Studies of children's sociodramatic play as a function of socioeconomic status report conflicting and marginal findings which militate against unqualified generalizations that economically disadvantaged children engage in less and poorer-quality sociodramatic play. Further, definitive conclusions on the basis of these studies are unwarranted because of flawed methodological procedures, confounding variables, and insufficient consideration of how verbal behavior, a critical component of sociodramatic play, is affected by situational variables. It is concluded that data from play intervention studies with low-income children and ethnographic studies of children from non-Western societies are virtually irrelevant to the issue of social class differences. The theoretical significance of social class differences in pretend play in general, and sociodramatic play in particular, even if found consistently, is unclear. In future research, priority should be given to both improved assessment of social class differences and clarification of how these differences relate to competences thought to be consequences of sociodramatic and pretend play.