Children's reasoning with peers in cooperative and competitive contexts

We report two studies that demonstrate how 5- and 7-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, 7-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.