Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Jan;28(1):e13581.
doi: 10.1111/desc.13581.

Infants' Social Evaluation of Helpers and Hinderers: A Large-Scale, Multi-Lab, Coordinated Replication Study

Kelsey Lucca  1 Francis Yuen  2 Yiyi Wang  3 Nicolás Alessandroni  4 Olivia Allison  5 Mario Alvarez  1 Emma L Axelsson  6 Janina Baumer  7 Heidi A Baumgartner  8 Julie Bertels  9 Mitali Bhavsar  10 Krista Byers-Heinlein  4 Arthur Capelier-Mourguy  11 Hitomi Chijiiwa  12 Chantelle S-S Chin  2 Natalie Christner  13 Laura K Cirelli  14 John Corbit  15 Moritz M Daum  16   17 Tiffany Doan  14 Michaela Dresel  18 Anna Exner  19 Wenxi Fei  20 Samuel H Forbes  21 Laura Franchin  22 Michael C Frank  23 Alessandra Geraci  24 Michelle Giraud  25 Megan E Gornik  26 Charlotte Grosse Wiesmann  27 Tobias Grossmann  5 Isabelle M Hadley  26 Naomi Havron  28   29 Annette M E Henderson  30 Emmy Higgs Matzner  31 Bailey A Immel  32 Grzegorz Jankiewicz  33 Wiktoria Jędryczka  33 Yasuhiro Kanakogi  12 Jonathan F Kominsky  34 Casey Lew-Williams  35 Zoe Liberman  32 Liquan Liu  36   37   38 Yilin Liu  39 Miriam T Loeffler  16   17 Alia Martin  18 Julien Mayor  40 Xianwei Meng  41 Michal Misiak  42   43 David Moreau  30   44 Mira L Nencheva  23   35 Linda S Oña  45   46 Yenny Otálora  47 Markus Paulus  13 Bill Pepe  48 Charisse B Pickron  31 Lindsey J Powell  48 Marina Proft  49 Alyssa A Quinn  6 Hannes Rakoczy  49 Peter J Reschke  50 Ronit Roth-Hanania  51 Katrin Rothmaler  27   52 Karola Schlegelmilch  45   46 Laura Schlingloff-Nemecz  34   53 Mark A Schmuckler  14 Tobias Schuwerk  13 Sabine Seehagen  19 Hilal H Şen  54 Munna R Shainy  23   55 Valentina Silvestri  25 Melanie Soderstrom  26 Jessica Sommerville  56 Hyun-Joo Song  57 Piotr Sorokowski  33 Sandro E Stutz  16   17 Yanjie Su  58 Hernando Taborda-Osorio  59 Alvin W M Tan  23 Denis Tatone  34 Teresa Taylor-Partridge  60 Chiu Kin Adrian Tsang  2   61 Arkadiusz Urbanek  62 Florina Uzefovsky  63 Ingmar Visser  7 Annie E Wertz  32   46 Madison Williams  4 Kristina Wolsey  30 Terry Tin-Yau Wong  61 Amanda M Woodward  64 Yang Wu  14 Zhen Zeng  38   65 Lucie Zimmer  13 J Kiley Hamlin  2
Affiliations

Infants' Social Evaluation of Helpers and Hinderers: A Large-Scale, Multi-Lab, Coordinated Replication Study

Kelsey Lucca et al. Dev Sci. 2025 Jan.

Erratum in

Abstract

Evaluating whether someone's behavior is praiseworthy or blameworthy is a fundamental human trait. A seminal study by Hamlin and colleagues in 2007 suggested that the ability to form social evaluations based on third-party interactions emerges within the first year of life: infants preferred a character who helped, over hindered, another who tried but failed to climb a hill. This sparked a new line of inquiry into the origins of social evaluations; however, replication attempts have yielded mixed results. We present a preregistered, multi-laboratory, standardized study aimed at replicating infants' preference for Helpers over Hinderers. We intended to (1) provide a precise estimate of the effect size of infants' preference for Helpers over Hinderers, and (2) determine the degree to which preferences are based on social information. Using the ManyBabies framework for big team-based science, we tested 1018 infants (567 included, 5.5-10.5 months) from 37 labs across five continents. Overall, 49.34% of infants preferred Helpers over Hinderers in the social condition, and 55.85% preferred characters who pushed up, versus down, an inanimate object in the nonsocial condition; neither proportion differed from chance or from each other. This study provides evidence against infants' prosocial preferences in the hill paradigm, suggesting the effect size is weaker, absent, and/or develops later than previously estimated. As the first of its kind, this study serves as a proof-of-concept for using active behavioral measures (e.g., manual choice) in large-scale, multi-lab projects studying infants.

Keywords: experimental methods; infancy; moral development; reproducibility; social cognition; social development.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Abramson, L., M. Dar, A. Te'eni, and A. Knafo‐Noam. 2016. Preferences for Helpers and Hinders in 9‐ and 18‐Month‐Old Infants. Unpublished raw data.
    1. Bardi, L., L. Regolin, and F. Simion. 2011. “Biological Motion Preference in Humans at Birth: Role of Dynamic and Configural Properties.” Developmental Science 14, no. 2: 353–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐7687.2010.00985.x.
    1. Barr, R. 2010. “Transfer of Learning Between 2D and 3D Sources During Infancy: Informing Theory and Practice.” Developmental Review 30, no. 2: 128–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2010.03.001.
    1. Bergmann, C., S. Tsuji, P. E. Piccinini, et al. 2018. “Promoting Replicability in Developmental Research Through Meta‐Analyses: Insights From Language Acquisition Research.” Child Development 89: 1996–2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13079.
    1. Blake, P. R., K. McAuliffe, J. Corbit, et al. 2015. “The Ontogeny of Fairness in Seven Societies.” Nature 528, no. 7581: 258–261. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A437223659/HRCA?u=anon~1cb3f10e&sid=g....