Children's moral judgments, attributions of emotion, and their associations were examined in hypothetical, prototypical situations and situations of provocation and peer retaliation. Children judged prototypical and provoked moral transgressions (hitting and teasing). Hypothetical moral transgressions were judged to be more serious and deserving of punishment; children reasoned about concerns with others' welfare more for prototypical than for provoked transgressions and when retaliation involved hitting rather than teasing. (Author)