Children's and Adolescents' Expectations about Challenging Unfair Group Norms

Youth often hold group norms that perpetuate inequality. One way these norms can be changed is by challenging these norms by choosing to include new members into these groups who hold morally just norms. In the current study, children's and adolescents' inclusion decisions and social reasoning about challenging group norms through inclusion were investigated. The sample included 9-10 (children) and 13-14 year-olds (adolescents) (N = 673, 54.4% female). Participants supported including challengers into groups holding norms supporting relational aggression and unequal allocation of resources, but they were less likely to support including a challenger into a physically aggressive group. Age-related differences and gender differences were found: children and female participants were more likely to include challengers than were adolescents and male participants. The findings indicate that youth support including new members who would challenge morally questionable group norms, but that their support depends on the specific norm the group holds.

Theory of Mind and Resource Allocation in the Context of Hidden Inequality

In many situations, children evaluate straightforward resource inequalities as unfair. It remains unclear, however, how children interpret hidden inequalities (i.e., inequalities that are unknown to allocators and/or recipients). Children 3-9-years-old (N = 87) evaluated and attributed intentions to a naïve resource allocator who, while unaware of a hidden inequality, made three hypothetical resource allocations: 1) an unknowingly equitable allocation (which rectified the inequality), 2) an inequitable allocation (which perpetuated the inequality), and 3) an equal allocation (which maintained the inequality). Children without false belief morally-relevant theory of mind (FB MoToM) attributed more positive intentions to the unknowingly equitable allocation than to the inequitable allocation. Children with FB MoToM, however, did not differ in their attributions of intentions to the unknowingly equitable and inequitable allocations, reflecting their knowledge that the naïve allocator was not aware of the hidden inequality. Further, children's attributions of intentions were related to their evaluations of the allocations. These findings underscore the importance of children's social cognitive inferences to their evaluations of resource allocation decisions.

Social Exclusion Based on Group Membership is a Form of Prejudice

Children around the world are affected by bias, prejudice, and discrimination. In this chapter, we argue that intergroup social exclusion-exclusion of peers on the basis of group membership-is a form of prejudice. As such, research efforts should be directed at uncovering the negative intergroup attitudes that sustain these behaviors, and encouraging the development of children's capacity to resist biases in favor of inclusion and just treatment of others. In order to interpret what is known about intergroup social exclusion in childhood, as well as identify compelling issues for current investigation, we introduce our integrative social reasoning developmental model, which emphasizes how children weigh moral and social concerns in everyday peer contexts. This chapter emphasizes three areas of research that have contributed to understanding social inclusion and exclusion decisions in childhood which include the roles of: (1) intergroup contact and friendship, (2) peer group norms, and (3) messages from parents and teachers. While providing a background on the state of research to date, this chapter also pinpoints recent work, shedding new light on the complex interplay of moral reasoning and intergroup attitudes in children's inclusion and exclusion decisions.

Adolescent Reasoning about Drug Use

In this study, adolescents' reasoning about drug use was investigated from a social-cognitive perspective. In an interview and classification task, adolescents were asked to (a) evaluate drug use in comparison to other social and moral transgressions; (b) distinguish between soft and hard legal and illegal drugs; (c) conceptualize drug use in relation to acts of self-harm, such as suicide; (d) weigh legal, societal, physical, and psychological consequences of drug use; and (e) evaluate authorities' jurisdictions to prohibit drug use. Sixty adolescents, evenly divided between males and females, in Grades 10, 11, and 12 participated. Age and gender differences emerged regarding adolescents' judgments about drug use and whether individuals have the right to harm themselves. The findings have implications for research on adolescent social reasoning and for drug education programs.

Rectifying social inequalities in a resource allocation task

To investigate whether children rectify social inequalities in a resource allocation task, participants (N=185 African-American and European-American 5-6year-olds and 10-11year-olds) witnessed an inequality of school supplies between peers of different racial backgrounds. Assessments were conducted on how children judged the wrongfulness of the inequality, allocated new resources to racial ingroup and outgroup recipients, evaluated alternative allocation strategies, and reasoned about their decisions. Younger children showed ingroup favorability; their responses differed depending on whether they had witnessed their ingroup or an outgroup at a disadvantage. With age, children increasingly reasoned about the importance of equal access to school supplies and correcting past disparities. Older children judged the resource inequality negatively, allocated more resources to the disadvantaged group, and positively evaluated the actions of others who did the same, regardless of whether they had seen their racial ingroup or an outgroup at a disadvantage. Thus, balancing moral and social group concerns enabled individuals to rectify inequalities and ensure fair access to important resources regardless of racial group membership.

Age-Related Changes in Children's Associations of Economic Resources and Race

Age-related changes in children’s associations of economic resources and race were investigated. The sample (N = 308) included 5–6 year-olds (n = 153, M = 6.01 years, SD = 0.33 years) and 10–11 year-olds (n = 155, M = 11.12 years, SD = 0.59 years) of African–American (n = 93), European–American (n = 92), Latino (n = 62), Asian–American (n = 23), and multi-racial or multi-ethnic (n = 26) background. Participants matched pairs of target children (African–American and European–American) with visual indicators of low, middle, and high economic status. Children’s associations of economic resources with racial groups changed with age, and reflected different associations at high, middle, and low levels of the economic spectrum. Specifically, children associated targets of both races with middle economic status at a comparable rate, and with age, increasingly associated targets of both races with indicators of middle economic status. By contrast, both younger and older children associated African–American targets with indicators of low economic status more frequently than European–American targets. Finally, children associated African–American targets with indicators of high economic status less frequently with age, resulting in a perceived disparity in favor of European–American targets at high economic status among older children that was not present among younger children. No differences were found by participants’ own racial or ethnic background. These results highlight the need to move beyond a dichotomized view (rich or poor) to include middle economic status when examining children’s associations of economic resources and race.

The educational impact of Rechov Sumsum/Shara’a Simsim: A Sesame Street television series to promote respect and understanding among children living in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza

A pre-and post-test study assessed the effects of Israeli and Palestinian children’s viewing of Rechov Sumsum/Shara’a Simsim, a television series presenting messages of mutual respect and understanding. Israeli-Jewish, Palestinian-Israeli, and Palestinian preschoolers ( N = 275) were interviewed about their social judgments. Results showed that although some of the children had negative conceptions about adult Arabs and Jews, children, on the whole, did not invoke these stereotypes when evaluating peer conflict situations between Israeli and Palestinian children. Exposure to the programme was linked to an increase in children’s use of both prosocial justifications to resolve conflicts and positive attributes to describe members of the other group. Palestinian children’s abilities to identify symbols of their own culture increased over time. The results indicate the effectiveness of media-based interventions such as Rechov Sumsum/Shara’a Simsim on countering negative stereotypes by building a peer-oriented context that introduces children to the everyday lives of people from different cultures.

Young Children's Conceptions of Transgressions with Friends and Nonfriends

The aim of this study was to investigate young children's conceptions of friendship and transgressions. A total of 48 preschool children were asked, in an interview, to cite reasons for their friendships and nonfriendships, to provide judgements and evaluations of transgressions involving friends and nonfriends, and to indicate preferences for conflict resolving strategies for friends and nonfriends. Results of interviews indicated that young children do make conceptual distinctions between friends and nonfriends in terms of judgements and justifications concerning transgressions. The overall pattern of results suggests that children are forming and utilising conceptions of friendship that are invoked when evaluating social transgressions in the preschool years.

Korean, Japanese, and US students’ judgments about peer exclusion: Evidence for diversity

Children and adolescents (4th-, 7th-, and 10th-graders) from Korea ( N 1/4 553) were surveyed regarding their evaluations of peer group exclusion of atypical peers: aggressive behaviour, unconventional appearance, acting like a clown, cross-gender behaviour, slow runner, and sad personality. The data were compared to a previously collected data set from Japan ( N = 513), and the US ( N 1/4 542) using the identical assessment. It was hypothesised that differences between Korean and Japanese cultures would be found, which would support our proposal that Asian cultures should not be automatically grouped as one monolithic “collectivistic” culture. Further, it was expected that students’ judgments of exclusion, conformity, and self-perceived differences would vary by the context of exclusion in all three cultures as well as by age and gender of the participants. The results for the exclusion judgments confirmed our hypotheses regarding within-Asian cultural differences, and the findings for judgments about conformity and self-perceived differences provide a mixed picture of confirmation for our expectations. In general, the results support our theory of developmental social cognition in which multiple sources of influence have a significant effect on social decision-making involving the exclusion of others.

Middle class Colombian children’s evaluations of personal, moral, and social-conventional interactions in the classroom

The aim of this study was to investigate Colombian children’s evaluations of locus of control, compliance, teacher legitimacy, and teacher methods of conflict resolution regarding personal, moral, and social-conventional interactions in the classroom setting. Sixty-three middle class Colombian children at 3 years (n = 20), 5 years (n = 24), and 7 years (n = 19) of age, almost evenly divided by gender, were individually interviewed. With increasing age, children judged that children, not teachers, should make decisions (locus of control) about choice of activities and choice of playmates, and for some social-conventional issues as well. The vast majority of children, with increasing age, preferred that teachers use negotiation and explanation instead of punishment when responding to all types of conflicts, personal, moral, and social-conventional ones. Colombian children’s reasoning about personal, moral, and social-conventional events was not strictly “hierarchical” or “authority-oriented” as might be expected from recent cultural theorising.

Evaluations of Interracial Peer Encounters by Majority and Minority U.S. Children and Adolescents

U.S. majority (European-American) and minority (African-American, Latin-American, Asian-American) students were interviewed regarding race-based and non-race based reasons for exclusion in interracial peer dyads (N = 685), evenly divided by gender at 4^th, 7^th, and 10^th grades attending 20 public schools. All students judged race-based exclusion as the most wrong followed by non-raced based reasons such as lack of shared interests, parental discomfort, and peer pressure. Minority students were more likely to judge non-race based exclusion as wrong than were majority students, and were more likely to expect that racial exclusion occurs, indicating that ethnic background and social experience are significantly related to interpretations of interracial peer dyadic reasons for exclusion.

Children's Social and Moral Reasoning About Exclusion

Developmental research on social and moral reasoning about exclusion has utilized a social-domain theory, in contrast to a global stage theory, to investigate children's evaluations of gender- and race-based peer exclusion. The social-domain model postulates that moral, social-conventional, and personal reasoning coexist in children's evaluations of inclusion and exclusion, and that the priority given to these forms of judgments varies by the age of the child, the context, and the target of exclusion. Findings from developmental intergroup research studies disconfirm a general-stage-model approach to morality in the child, and provide empirical data on the developmental origins and emergence of intergroup attitudes regarding prejudice, bias, and exclusion.

Children's understanding of equity in the context of inequality

In the context of a pre-existing resource inequality, the concerns for strict equality (allocating the same number of resources to all recipients) conflict with the concerns for equity (allocating resources to rectify the inequality). This study demonstrated age-related changes in children's (3-8 years old, N = 133) ability to simultaneously weigh the concerns for equality and equity through the analysis of children's judgements, allocations, and reasoning in the context of a pre-existing inequality. Three- to 4-year-olds took equity into account in their judgements of allocations, but allocated resources equally in a behavioural task. In contrast, 5- to 6-year-olds rectified the inequality in their allocations, but judged both equitable and equal allocations to be fair. It was not until 7-8 years old that children focused on rectifying the inequality in their allocations and judgements, as well as judged equal allocations less positively than equitable allocations, thereby demonstrating a more complete understanding of the necessity of rectifying inequalities. The novel findings revealed age-related changes from 3 to 8 years old regarding how the concerns for equity and equality develop, and how children's judgements, allocations, and reasoning are coordinated when making allocation decisions.

Balancing the Fair Treatment of Others While Preserving Group Identity and Autonomy

Social exclusion and inclusion from groups, as well as the distribution of resources, are fundamental aspects of social life, and serve as sources of conflicts that bear on issues of fairness and equality, beginning in childhood. For the most part, research on social exclusion and allocation of resources has not focused on the issue of group membership. Yet, social exclusion from groups and the denial of resources reflect societal issues pertaining to social inequality and its counterpoint, fair treatment of others. Social inequality occurs when opportunities and resources are distributed unevenly in society, often through group norms about allocation that reflect socially defined categories of persons. This occurs at multiple levels of societal organization, from experiences of exclusion in childhood such as being left out of a play activity, to being denied access to resources as a member of a group. These situations extend to larger level experiences in the adult world concerning social exclusion from voting, for example, or participation in educational institutions. Thus, most decisions regarding social exclusion and the denial of resources involve considerations of group identity and group membership, implicitly or explicitly, which contribute to prejudice and bias, even though this has rarely been investigated in developmental science. Current research illustrating the role of group identity and autonomy regarding decision-making about social exclusion and the denial of resources is reviewed from the Social Reasoning Developmental model, one that integrates social domain theory and developmental social identity theories to investigate how children use moral, conventional, and psychological judgments to evaluate contexts reflecting group identity, group norms, and intergroup dynamics.

Challenging gender stereotypes: Theory of mind and peer group dynamics

To investigate the social cognitive skills related to challenging gender stereotypes, children (N = 61, 3-6 years) evaluated a peer who challenged gender stereotypic norms held by the peer's group. Participants with false belief theory of mind (FB ToM) competence were more likely than participants who did not have FB ToM to expect a peer to challenge the group's stereotypes and propose that the group engage in a non-stereotypic activity. Further, participants with FB ToM rated challenging the peer group more positively. Participants without FB ToM did not differentiate between their own and the group's evaluation of challenges to the group's stereotypic norms, but those with ToM competence asserted that they would be more supportive of challenging the group norm than would the peer group. Results reveal the importance of social-cognitive competencies for recognizing the legitimacy of challenging stereotypes, and for understanding one's own and other group perspectives.

The impact of onlooking and including bystander behaviour on judgments and emotions regarding peer exclusion

We investigated judgments and emotions in contexts of social exclusion that varied as a function of bystander behaviour (N = 173, 12- and 16-year-olds). Adolescents responded to film vignettes depicting a target excluded by a group with no bystanders, onlooking bystanders, or bystanders who included the target. Adolescents were asked to judge the behaviour and attribute emotions to the excluding group, the excluded target, and the bystanders. Younger adolescents judged the behaviour of the excluding group as more wrong than older adolescents when there were no bystanders present, indicating that the presence of bystanders was viewed as lessening the negative outcome of exclusion by the younger group. Yet, bystanders play a positive role only when they are includers, not when they are silent observers. This distinction was revealed by the findings that adolescents rated the behaviour of onlooking bystanders as more wrong compared with the behaviour of including bystanders. Moreover, all adolescents justified the inclusive behaviour more frequently with empathy than the onlooking behaviour. Adolescents also anticipated more empathy to including bystanders than to onlooking bystanders, as well as anticipated more guilt to onlooking bystanders than including bystanders. The findings are discussed in light of the role of group norms and group processes regarding bystanders' roles in social exclusion peer encounters.