Children learn what is right or wrong selectively from a legitimate authority’s punishment

When parents, teachers or other authorities punish children for actions that violate social or moral norms, do children just avoid the punishment, or learn that the punished action was wrong? We test the hypothesis that young children learn that punished actions are wrong but only selectively, when they deem the punisher to be legitimate. Across three pre-registered studies, 6- to 11-year-old children (n=196) in the United States heard vignettes in which an authority decided whether to punish another character for doing an unfamiliar action. Children then reported how right or wrong the unfamiliar action was. Children learned that novel actions were wrong only when the action was punished by a legitimate authority (i.e., who cares about justice and fair treatment, or was chosen by the group). Familiar punishments (timeouts) and authorities (teachers) may facilitate this inference in younger children. Thus, young children evaluate the source of punishment and engage in selective learning of the norms of their society.