2019•Spectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Open access

“It was a bit my fault and a bit his fault": Mothers' and Early School-aged Children’s Blame Attributions in Conversations about Peer Conflicts

Mawuena Badasu

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

In a sample of 36 dyads, this study investigated mothers’ and their 6-7-year-old children’s blaming strategies when engaged in conversations about the children’s peer conflicts. Each dyad discussed two conflicts in which the child was hurt, one to which they felt they contributed (shared fault) and the other in which they felt they did not contribute to the conflict (no fault). We specifically examined: (1) how conversations about the two events differed in terms of maximizing and mitigating blame attributions across three contexts (the peer’s harm against the child, child’s harm to the peer, and the child’s self-protection from harm) (2) variations between mothers and children’s maximizing and mitigating blame strategies (3) the specific dimensions that mothers and children considered in making blame attributions. Results revealed that families maximized responsibility more in the no fault conversations in the context of harm to the child and self-protection from harm, whereas they maximized blame concerning the child’s harm to his/her peer more in the shared fault conversations. Comparing mothers and children, findings indicated that mothers maximized blame more in self-protection contexts, whereas children maximized blame for the peers’ harm to child and mitigated responsibility across all contexts. Regarding dimensions of blame attribution, avoidability and consequences of harm were used most often by families. Mothers referenced avoidability and act evaluations most frequently whereas children more often discussed presence of harmful acts and subsequent responses to one’s own harm. Findings suggest that maternal socialization of blame is context-sensitive as mother-child dyads are listening to and largely agreeing with each other. Mothers’ emphasis on self-protection raises questions about parental concerns for children’s responsibility and agency in the context of victimization. Implications for children’s moral development are discussed.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In a sample of 36 dyads, this study investigated mothers’ and their 6-7-year-old children’s blaming strategies when engaged in conversations about the children’s peer conflicts. Each dyad discussed two conflicts in which the child was hurt, one to which they felt they contributed (shared fault) and the other in which they felt they did not contribute to the conflict (no fault). We specifically examined: (1) how conversations about the two events differed in terms of maximizing and mitigating blame attributions across three contexts (the peer’s harm against the child, child’s harm to the peer, and the child’s self-protection from harm) (2) variations between mothers and children’s maximizing and mitigating blame strategies (3) the specific dimensions that mothers and children considered in making blame attributions. Results revealed that families maximized responsibility more in the no fault conversations in the context of harm to the child and self-protection from harm, whereas they maximized blame concerning the child’s harm to his/her peer more in the shared fault conversations. Comparing mothers and children, findings indicated that mothers maximized blame more in self-protection contexts, whereas children maximized blame for the peers’ harm to child and mitigated responsibility across all contexts. Regarding dimensions of blame attribution, avoidability and consequences of harm were used most often by families. Mothers referenced avoidability and act evaluations most frequently whereas children more often discussed presence of harmful acts and subsequent responses to one’s own harm. Findings suggest that maternal socialization of blame is context-sensitive as mother-child dyads are listening to and largely agreeing with each other. Mothers’ emphasis on self-protection raises questions about parental concerns for children’s responsibility and agency in the context of victimization. Implications for children’s moral development are discussed.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In a sample of 36 dyads, this study investigated mothers’ and their 6-7-year-old children’s blaming strategies when engaged in conversations about the children’s peer conflicts. Each dyad discussed two conflicts in which the child was hurt, one to which they felt they contributed (shared fault) and the other in which they felt they did not contribute to the conflict (no fault). We specifically examined: (1) how conversations about the two events differed in terms of maximizing and mitigating blame attributions across three contexts (the peer’s harm against the child, child’s harm to the peer, and the child’s self-protection from harm) (2) variations between mothers and children’s maximizing and mitigating blame strategies (3) the specific dimensions that mothers and children considered in making blame attributions. Results revealed that families maximized responsibility more in the no fault conversations in the context of harm to the child and self-protection from harm, whereas they maximized blame concerning the child’s harm to his/her peer more in the shared fault conversations. Comparing mothers and children, findings indicated that mothers maximized blame more in self-protection contexts, whereas children maximized blame for the peers’ harm to child and mitigated responsibility across all contexts. Regarding dimensions of blame attribution, avoidability and consequences of harm were used most often by families. Mothers referenced avoidability and act evaluations most frequently whereas children more often discussed presence of harmful acts and subsequent responses to one’s own harm. Findings suggest that maternal socialization of blame is context-sensitive as mother-child dyads are listening to and largely agreeing with each other. Mothers’ emphasis on self-protection raises questions about parental concerns for children’s responsibility and agency in the context of victimization. Implications for children’s moral development are discussed.

Key concepts: Blame, Attribution, Harm, Psychology, Social psychology, Developmental psychology, Context (archaeology), Dyad

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
“It was a bit my fault and a bit his fault": Mothers' and Early School-aged Children’s Blame Attributions in Conversations about Peer Conflicts — Research Paper | ScholarLens