| Abstract: | We report two studies that demonstrate how five‐ and seven‐year‐olds adapt their production of arguments to either a cooperative or a competitive context. Two games elicited agreements from peer dyads about placing animals on either of two halves of a playing field owned by either child. Children had to produce arguments to justify these decisions. Played in a competitive context that encouraged placing animals on one's own half, children's arguments showed a bias that was the result of withholding known arguments. In a cooperative context, children produced not only more arguments, but also more ‘two‐sided’ arguments. Also, seven‐year‐olds demonstrated a more frequent and strategic use of arguments that specifically refuted decisions that would favour their peers. The results suggest that cooperative contexts provide a more motivating context for children to produce arguments. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject ? - Reasoning is a social skill that allows people to reach joint decisions.
- Preschoolers give reasons for their proposals in their peer conversations.
- By adolescence, children use sophisticated arguments (e.g., refutations and rebuttals).
What the present study adds? - Cooperation offers a more motivating context for children's argument production.
- Seven‐year‐olds are more strategic than five‐year‐olds in their reasoning with peers.
- Children's reasoning with others becomes more sophisticated after preschool years.
|
