对社会约定的理解和推理是义务推理研究中的热点之一，也是儿童日常生活中的一项重要课题。本研究从发展的角度，采用四择多的评定任务和情绪判断与归因任务考察了4, 5, 6岁幼儿对两种形式的社会约定((if p, then q)—以义务规则形式表述的条件许诺和以准许规则形式表述的条件警告—中同济、权威以及双方同时作为约定违背者的检测情况及其对约定违背中的违反者、受害者以及假设自己为约定中的小孩一方时的情绪判断与归因，以揭示儿童早期对社会约定的认知水平、义务推理潜力及其对约定违背的情绪结果的认知特点。主要结论如下:
1)幼儿对日常教养情境下条件许诺和条件警告的认知发展表现出相同的趋势，并可划分为四种认知水平:水平I一初步理解同济违反(4,5岁，2.5%, 32.5% ) ;水平II--理解,同违反(5, 6岁，15%, 15% );水平I I I--理解权威违反(5, 6岁，岁，37.5%, 52.5%):水平IV一初步理解社会约定中的双违反((6岁，30%)。
Understanding and reasoning about social contract (ifp，then q) is the focus of deontic reasoning, as well as an important project in hildren's everyday life. 4, 5, and 6-year-olds' understanding of social contract violation and the corresponding emotion consequence were examined through multi一choice evaluation tasks and emotion judgment tasks ensued. Two types of social contracts一一conditional promises presented in the form of obligation schema and conditional warnings in permission schcma一一were explored respectively in two studies including two experiments each. The results indicate that:
1)Preschoolers' understanding of conditional promise and warning in daily circumstances shows similar and evident developmental progress, and can be classified info four cognitive levels: Leve) I, preparatory understanding of peer violation (4&5一year-olds, 82.5%&32.5%); Level II, understanding of peer violation (5&C-year-olds, 15%&15%); bevel III, understanding of authority violation (5&6-year-olds, 37.5%&52.5%); Level IV, preparatory understanding of bilateral violation (6-year-olds, 30%).
Accuracy in the detection of social contract violation is closely associated with violating figure and children's ages, which is illuminated by the four cognitive levels above and is called as the "perspective effects" in evaluation tasks. especially in the Situations with bilateral violaltion, many children could only recognize the child's violation and neglected the mom's one. This is called as the "effect of priority detection for peer violation".
2) Peshoolers haven't understood conditional promise as bicodnditional, and this understanding for conditional warning may be better.
3) For the conditional promise and warning, the same mode occurs in children's emotion cognition for emotional consequence concerning contract violation.
4)&5一year一olds' emotion attributions are mainly one-dimension oriented (only por q in the contract is eonsidered) and are considered as a naive emotional perspective; as growing older (mainly at 6), they can combine the "p" and "q" in both evaluation task and emotion task and have the contract-oriented emotion perspective. This developmental trend is especially evident in emotion cognition for the peer as victim, anal 6-year-olds began to give do111111alltly p-q combined reason.
4) Children's emotion judgment and attribution for the peer or authority as the violator or victim in social contract violation are some different.
Expectation of peer's emotion depends on whether the child can get reward or escape from punishment in the circumstances, not on their role as violator or victim; while expectation of authority's is associated with subjects' age and mom's role.
Emotion cognition for the peer are generally better than for the authority, especially when they act as victims; Cmotion cognition for the peer as violator are better than as victim and for the authority as bi-role are some better than as violator or victim.
5) There's no difference between preschoolers' emotion judgments towards story protagonist and themselves assumed to be story protagonist.