Abstract

This study examined whether the intensity of need and type of prosociality differentially predicted children’s and adolescents’ desirability, obligatoriness, and permissibility judgments of costly prosocial actions. A total of 165 8-10-year-old children and 13-15-year-old adolescents evaluated six hypothetical situations wherein one child needed to be helped, shared with, or comforted and another child decided whether or not to provide that assistance. Participants evaluated whether acting prosocially was desirable-obligatory, desirable-nonobligatory, undesirable-permissible, or undesirable-impermissible, and their reasoning was coded. Prosociality was evaluated as desirable-obligatory more in high-need situations. Overall, children more than adolescents evaluated prosociality as desirable. When the need was high, comforting more than helping and sharing was evaluated as desirable, whereas when the need was low, sharing was evaluated as particularly desirable. The reasoning underlying judgments differed across types of prosociality. Findings are discussed in relation to how varied types of need are related to children’s and adolescents’ prosocial judgments.