Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-8p85h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-18T15:19:49.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early sociomoral reasoning encompasses more than interpersonal relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 May 2026

Renée Baillargeon Open the ORCID record for Renée Baillargeon [Opens in a new window] ,
Lin Bian Open the ORCID record for Lin Bian [Opens in a new window] ,
Kyong-sun Jin Open the ORCID record for Kyong-sun Jin [Opens in a new window]  and
Francesco Margoni Open the ORCID record for Francesco Margoni [Opens in a new window]
Renée Baillargeon*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, USA rbaillar@illinois.edu
Lin Bian*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Chicago, Chicago, USA linbian@uchicago.edu
Kyong-sun Jin*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Sungshin Women’s University, Seoul, Republic of Korea kjin@sungshin.ac.kr
Francesco Margoni*
Affiliation:
Department of Social Studies, University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway francesco.margoni@uis.no
*
*Corresponding author.
*Corresponding author.
*Corresponding author.
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Thomas’s account suggests that infants are limited to reasoning about interpersonal relationships. We argue that this account fails to do justice to infants’ sociomoral reasoning. We describe an alternative account that grants infants expectations of harm avoidance, ingroup support, authority, fairness, and reciprocity. We highlight differences between the two accounts and suggest research directions for moving beyond these differences.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e27
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Baillargeon, R., Scott, R. M., He, Z., Sloane, S., Setoh, P., Jin, K., & Bian, L. (2015). Psychological and sociomoral reasoning in infancy. In Mikulincer, M. & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.), E. Borgida & J. A. Bargh (Assoc. Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Vol. 1. attitudes and social cognition (pp. 79–150). American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Bian, L., & Baillargeon, R. (2022). When are similar individuals a group? Early reasoning about similarity and in-group support. Psychological Science, 33(5), 752–764. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976211055185 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bian, L., Sloane, S., & Baillargeon, R. (2018). Infants expect ingroup support to override fairness when resources are limited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 115(11), 2705–2710. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719445115 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buyukozer Dawkins, M., Sloane, S., & Baillargeon, R. (2019). Do infants in the first year of life expect equal resource allocations?. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 116. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00116 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, J., Haidt, J., Koleva, S., Motyl, M., Iyer, R., Wojcik, S. P., & Ditto, P. H. (2013). Moral foundations theory: The pragmatic validity of moral pluralism. In Devine, P., Plant, A. (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 47, pp. 55–130). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-407236-7.00002-4 Google Scholar
Jin, K., & Baillargeon, R. (2017). Infants possess an abstract expectation of ingroup support. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 114(31), 8199–8204. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706286114 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jin, K., & Baillargeon, R. (2025). Who can be harmed? Infants’ reasoning about harm within and between moral circles. Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
Jin, K., Ting, F., He, Z., & Baillargeon, R. (2024). Infants expect some degree of positive and negative reciprocity between strangers. Nature Communications, 15, 7742. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51982-7 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liberman, Z., Kinzler, K. D., & Woodward, A. L. (2018). The early social significance of shared ritual actions. Cognition, 171, 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.10.018 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liberman, Z., Woodward, A. L., & Kinzler, K. D. (2017). Preverbal infants infer third-party social relationships based on language. Cognitive Science, 41(S3), 622–634. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12403 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Margoni, F., Baillargeon, R., & Surian, L. (2018). Infants distinguish between leaders and bullies. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 115(38), 8835–8843. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1801677115 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Margoni, F., & Thomsen, L. (2024). How infants predict respect-based power. Cognitive Psychology, 152, 101671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2024.101671 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Powell, L. J., & Spelke, E. S. (2013). Preverbal infants expect members of social groups to act alike. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 110(41), 3965–3972. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1304326110 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pun, A., Birch, S. A., & Baron, A. S. (2021). The power of allies: Infants’ expectations of social obligations during intergroup conflict. Cognition, 211, 104630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104630 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, M., Hetherington, C., Brink, K., & Wellman, H. M. (2015). Infants’ use of social partnerships to predict behavior. Developmental Science, 18(6), 909–916. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12267 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sloane, S., Baillargeon, R., & Premack, D. (2012). Do infants have a sense of fairness?. Psychological Science, 23(2), 196–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611422072 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spelke, E. S. (2022). What babies know: Core knowledge and composition. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190618247.001.0001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stavans, M., & Baillargeon, R. (2019). Infants expect leaders to right wrongs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 116(33), 16292–16301. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820091116 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ting, F., & Baillargeon, R. (2021). Toddlers draw broad negative inferences from wrongdoers’ moral violations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 118(39), e2109045118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2109045118 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ting, F., Buyukozwer Dawkins, M., Stavans, M., & Baillargeon, R. (2020). Principles and concepts in early moral cognition. In Decety, J. (Ed.), The social brain: A developmental perspective (pp. 41–65). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11970.001.0001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ting, F., He, Z., & Baillargeon, R. (2019). Toddlers and infants expect individuals to refrain from helping an ingroup victim’s aggressor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 116(13), 6025–6034. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817849116 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woo, B. M., Tan, E., & Hamlin, J. K. (2022). Human morality is based on an early-emerging moral core. Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, 4, 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-121020-023312 CrossRefGoogle Scholar