Constraints on conventions: Resolving two puzzles of conventionality

Area of Science:

• Social Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Moral Philosophy

Background:

• Social conventions are typically seen as arbitrary and changeable.
• However, individuals often judge some conventions as unchangeable or violations as wrong.
• This challenges the notion of 'pure' conventions detached from other concerns.

Purpose of the Study:

• To propose and test the "constraint view" of social conventions.
• To investigate how concerns for affected agents and others shape judgments about conventions.
• To offer a novel framework for understanding norm evaluation.

Main Methods:

• Four studies were conducted with preschoolers and adults.
• Participants evaluated actions and norms based on potential impacts.
• The research examined how non-conventional concerns constrain convention alterability.

Main Results:

• Findings supported the constraint view.
• Participants deemed conventions alterable only when changes did not negatively affect agents or others.
• Judgments about norms integrated conventional and non-conventional concerns.

Conclusions:

• Social conventions are perceived as alterable within constraints imposed by ethical considerations.
• Concerns for well-being of agents and affected parties are key to evaluating norms.
• The constraint view provides a new lens for social and moral development research.