Weighing first- and second-hand information: How children and adults evaluate sources of moral and factual knowledge across two cultures.

How do children and adults decide when to think for themselves and when to rely on others? In two cross-cultural experiments (N = 424), I ask whether children and adults value independent thinking over dependence on testimony when evaluating how others justify moral and empirical beliefs. In Study 1, 4- and 6-year-old children and adults in the United States and China evaluated two reasoners who made the same moral judgments (e.g., pushing others is wrong), but one showed independence in her thinking, and the other relied on another person's testimony. Adults in both cultures preferred the independent reasoner and judged her as more trustworthy, more likable, and more knowledgeable. Four- and 6-year-old Chinese children and 6-year-old U.S. children also judged the independent reasoner as having "better reasons" for her moral beliefs. In Study 2, when reasoning involved factual judgments about the content of containers, adults no longer preferred independent reasoning. Four- to 6-year-old Chinese children, however, maintained their preference for the independent reasoner, whereas U.S. children showed no clear preference. Taken together, these findings highlight how developmental and cultural factors influence not only what children learn but also how they evaluate the processes by which knowledge is acquired. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).