Professor Hayashi Hajimu and his colleagues at Kobe University's graduate school dare to say nothing not only to adults but also to elementary school students. "Random lies" are more moral than "action lies" that convey false information. It was clarified that there is a strong tendency to make a sweet judgment.
Deceiving by telling the other person what is different from the fact (positive lie) is "a lie by act", and deceiving by "dare not saying anything" (passive lie) even though you know the fact It is called "a lie of omission".People tend to judge bad things by omission more negatively than bad things by omission (inaction bias is less of a concern).This time, focusing on "presence or absence of remarks", there is a difference in the degree of bias (prejudice, cognitive distortion) depending on the age and situation, whether there is an omission bias in the moral judgment of the lie of act and the lie of omission. I examined whether it was.
参加者は小学3年生（8～9歳）78人、6年生（11～12歳）76人、大人80人。「利己的状況」と「他者をかばう状況」の類似した2種の話を用意し、それぞれの状況で「意図的悪事」と「偶発的悪事」が描かれている計4場面を提示し、質問に回答してもらった。
As a result, in all four scenes, the lie by act was judged to be worse than the lie by omission, and not only adults but also children showed omission bias in the moral judgment of the lie.Also, the magnitude of inaction bias in adults was greater for selfish lies than for lies that protect others, and for lies that hide intentional wrongdoing than for lies that hide accidental wrongdoing. In elementary school, there was no difference depending on the situation.
This finding is easy to overlook in providing guidance to enhance the morality of children, and is considered to be useful information.
Paper information:[Journal of Experimental Child Psychology] Omission bias in children's and adults' moral judgments of lies
