Making Sense of Divergent Interpretations of Conflictand Developing an Interpretive Understanding of Mind

Abstract

Our goals in this study were to develop a measure of children's understanding of divergent interpretations of conflict and relate that measure to children's more general interpretive understanding of mind (Carpendale & Chandler, 1996). Eighty-nine children between 4 and 9 years of age heard 4 conflict stories in which fault was ambiguous. Children overwhelmingly suggested that antagonists would blame each other and adequately justified those judgments. However, children under 7 years did not believe that it made sense for antagonists to disagree, and children were better able to explain why mutual blame made sense as they grew older. Children's judgments of the legitimacy of and explanations for divergent conflict interpretations were correlated with similar measures assessing their understanding of the general interpretive quality of mind. Findings are discussed in terms of the role of everyday interaction for the gradual acquisition of interpretive understanding.