06 - Formation of prosociality (Kosse)

Question 1

Which three distinct groups are studied?

Answer 1

High SES
Control Low SES
Treatment Low SES

Question 2

When is a family defined as low SES)

Answer 2

• income below 30% qunatile
• neither mother nor father have degree that qualifies for college entrance
• single parent

Question 3

study design

Answer 3

• compare control low SES and high SES (descriptive study): informs about the role of the parental background, i.e. difference in socio-economic endowmends
• compate low SES and treatment low SES (experimental study): causal evidence on the potential role of investments in the form of providing an enriched social environment

Question 4

timeline

Answer 4

1. Initial experimental and survey measurements
2. One-Year intervention study
3. Measurements
4. Two-year follow-up measurements

Question 5

measurement of prosociality of children

3 dimensions

Answer 5

altruism: incentivized dictator game experiments
trust: questionnaire answers of the child (three questions concerning trust)
other-regarding behavior: mother survey

Question 6

measurement of prosociality of the mother

Answer 6

altruism: measured using a question
trust: measured using two questions
other-regarding behavior: Big Five Dimension Agreeableness

Question 7

Descriptive results on the effect of paternal background

-

Answer 7

• children from high SES households are significantly more prosocial than children from low SEShousehoulds
• spending more time on social interaction and feedback providing tasks promotes childrens’ prosociality
• mothers prosocial attitudes strongly affect children’s prosociality

Question 8

causal effect of social environment on prosociality

Answer 8

• children whose social environment was randomly enriched through participation in the mentoring intervention score 27,3 % of a standard deviation higher on the prosociality measure than children from the control group
• two-year follow-up: over the time span of two years, we observe a general increase in prosociality in our sample of elementary school children, the high-low SES developmental gap in prosociality that we have seen in wave 2 persists to wave 3