The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fairness Expectations and Altruistic Sharing in 15-Month-Old Human Infants
Open accessAbstract
Human cooperation is a key driving force behind the evolutionary success of our hominin lineage. At the proximate level, biologists and social scientists have identified other-regarding preferences--such as fairness based on egalitarian motives, and altruism--as likely candidates for fostering large-scale cooperation. A critical question concerns the ontogenetic origins of these constituents of cooperative behavior, as well as whether they emerge independently or in an interrelated fashion. The answer to this question will shed light on the interdisciplinary debate regarding the significance of such preferences for explaining how humans become such cooperative beings. We investigated 15-month-old infants' sensitivity to fairness, and their altruistic behavior, assessed via infants' reactions to a third-party resource distribution task, and via a sharing task. Our results challenge current models of the development of fairness and altruism in two ways. First, in contrast to past work suggesting that fairness and altruism may not emerge until early to mid-childhood, 15-month-old infants are sensitive to fairness and can engage in altruistic sharing. Second, infants' degree of sensitivity to fairness as a third-party observer was related to whether they shared toys altruistically or selfishly, indicating that moral evaluations and prosocial behavior are heavily interconnected from early in development. Our results present the first evidence that the roots of a basic sense of fairness and altruism can be found in infancy, and that these other-regarding preferences develop in a parallel and interwoven fashion. These findings support arguments for an evolutionary basis--most likely in dialectical manner including both biological and cultural mechanisms--of human egalitarianism given the rapidly developing nature of other-regarding preferences and their role in the evolution of human-specific forms of cooperation. Future work of this kind will help determine to what extent uniquely human sociality and morality depend on other-regarding preferences emerging early in life.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation
Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355399556151 · Cited by 11,264
The descent of man and selection in relation to sex
(1907) · The Journal of the Anthropological Society of Tokyo · doi:10.1537/ase1887.22.495 · Cited by 10,892
Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation
Nowak, M. A. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1133755 · Cited by 5,894
Cooperation and Punishment in Public Goods Experiments
Fehr, E., & Gächter, S. (2000) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.90.4.980 · Cited by 4,547 · cited 1×
“Further mechanisms that have been suggested to enforce cooperation are punishment including peer- and pool-punishment [9–15], reward [16–18], and policing [19].”
BackgroundBehavioral Game Theory: Experiments in Strategic Interaction
Camerer, C. F. (2003) · Cited by 3,722
Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02043 · Cited by 3,475 · cited 4×
“By assessing fairness and altruism in infants via both a violation-of-expectancy paradigm and behavioral measures, we sought to empirically validate the hypothesized theoretical interdependence between these two constructs [22,24], and to understand the underlying nature of infants’ potential fairness expectations.”
BackgroundInfluentialSzabó, G., & Fáth, G. (2007) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2007.04.004 · Cited by 2,974
Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought
Williams, G. C. (2008) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · doi:10.1515/9781400820108 · Cited by 2,762
Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior
(1999) · Ethology · doi:10.1046/j.1439-0310.1999.00372.x · Cited by 2,545
Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor's reach
Woodward, A. (1998) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00058-4 · Cited by 1,975
Cited by
Origins of Human Cooperation and Morality
Tomasello, M., & Vaish, A. (2013) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143812 · Cited by 916
A mutualistic approach to morality: The evolution of fairness by partner choice
Baumard, N., André, J.-B., & Sperber, D. (2013) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x11002202 · Cited by 668
Why people prefer unequal societies
Starmans, C., Sheskin, M., & Bloom, P. (2017) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-017-0082 · Cited by 508
A construct divided: prosocial behavior as helping, sharing, and comforting subtypes
Dunfield, K. A. (2014) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00958 · Cited by 396
The emergence of prosocial behavior: Why do infants and toddlers help, comfort, and share?
Paulus, M. (2014) · Child Development Perspectives · doi:10.1111/cdep.12066 · Cited by 267
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmidt, M. F. H., & Sommerville, J. A.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2011-10-07
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e23223
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1969620000
- Cited by
- 579
- References
- 62
- FWCI
- 42.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fairness Expectations and Altruistic Sharing in 15-Month-Old Human Infants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0023223
- The paper
- Schmidt, M. F. H., & Sommerville, J. A. (2011). Fairness Expectations and Altruistic Sharing in 15-Month-Old Human Infants. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023223
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.