Social group norms, school norms, and children's aggressive intentions

Rejecting ingroup loyalty for the truth: Children's and adolescents' evaluations of deviant peers within a misinformation intergroup context

Typically, children and adolescents dislike peers who deviate from their peer group's norm, preferring normative peers who are loyal to the peer ingroup. Yet children and adolescents also consider whether the behavior displayed by a deviant peer aligns with generic societally valued norms when evaluating peers within intergroup contexts. In an age where misinformation is rampant online, seeking the truth exemplifies a generic norm that is widely valued but not always upheld given that individuals often show loyalty to the ingroup. The current research explored the conflict between ingroup loyalty and seeking the truth. In this study, participants (N = 266; 8-15 years old) read about their school participating in an inter-school competition where their ingroup peer either accidentally or deliberately shared misinformation about their outgroup competitor. Participants with a peer group norm of ingroup loyalty positively morally evaluated a norm deviant seeking the truth, whereas those with a peer group norm of seeking the truth negatively morally evaluated a norm deviant showing ingroup loyalty. Participants also took into account the intentions of the misinformer in their evaluations of a deviant who was either loyal or questioning toward the misinformer. Overall, this study suggests that the norm of truth-seeking is welcomed and regarded as an important value to uphold both generically and at a peer group level, even when it violates the norm of ingroup loyalty. This research provides a novel contribution to understanding how factors like norms and intentionality interact with children's and adolescents' navigation of information in an age of misinformation.

Party, Academic, or Prepped for College? School Norm Profiles and Adolescent Well-being using National Data

The current study examined how schoolwide norms came together into distinct profiles and how norm profile membership was linked to adolescent well-being. Using school-level (N = 786) and student-level data (N = 174,587 12th grade students; 52% female; 64% White, 13% Latino, 12% Black, 12% other) from Monitoring the Future (MTF), we identified four distinct school profiles-average, academic, prepped-for-college, party-that had unique patterns of shared norms. Compared with average schools, academic schools (high academics and low substance use and social integration norms) were most advantageous for students, prepped-for-college schools (high academics, substance use, and social integration norms) had both benefits and drawbacks, and party schools (low academics and high substance use and social integration norms) were most detrimental.

When do bystanders get help from teachers or friends? Age and group membership matter when indirectly challenging social exclusion

We examined developmental changes in British children’s (8- to 10-year-olds) and adolescents’ (13- to 15-year-olds, N = 340; Female N = 171, 50.3%) indirect bystander reactions (i.e., judgments about whether to get help and from whom when witnessing social exclusion) and their social-moral reasoning regarding their reactions to social exclusion. We also explored, for the first time, how the group membership of the excluder and victim affect participants’ reactions. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they witnessed a peer being excluded from a school club by another peer. We manipulated the group membership of the victim (either British or an immigrant) and the group membership of the excluder (either British or an immigrant). Participants’ likelihood of indirect bystander reactions decreased from childhood into adolescence. Children were more likely to get help from a teacher or an adult than getting help from a friend, whereas adolescents were more likely to get help from a friend than getting help from a teacher or an adult. For both indirect bystander reactions, children justified their likelihood of responding by referring to their trust in their teachers and friends. Adolescents were more likely to refer to group loyalty and dynamics, and psychological reasons. The findings support and extend the Social Reasoning Developmental (SRD) approach by showing the importance of group processes with age in shaping children’s judgments about how to respond indirectly by asking for help from others, when they are bystanders in a situation that involves exclusion. The findings have practical implications for combating social exclusion and promoting prosocial bystander behavior in schools.

Unpacking the misfit effect: Exploring the influence of gender and social norms on the association between aggression and peer victimization

Social norms are vital for the functioning of adolescent peer groups; they can protect the well-being of groups and individual members, often by deterring harmful behaviors, such as aggression, through enforcement mechanisms like peer victimization; in adolescent peer groups, those who violate aggression norms are often subject to victimization. However, adolescents are nested within several levels of peer group contexts, ranging from small proximal groups, to larger distal groups, and social norms operate within each. This study assessed whether there are differences in the enforcement of aggression norms at different levels. Self-report and peer-nomination data were collected four times over the course of a school year from 1,454 early adolescents ( M age = 10.27; 53.9% boys) from Bogota, Colombia. Multilevel modeling provided support for social regulation of both physical aggression and relational aggression via peer victimization, as a function of gender, grade-level, proximal (friend) or distal (class) injunctive norms of aggression (perceptions of group-level attitudes), and descriptive norms of aggression. Overall, violation of proximal norms appears to be more powerfully enforced by adolescent peer groups. The findings are framed within an ecological systems theory of adolescent peer relationships.

School and Teacher Factors That Promote Adolescents' Bystander Responses to Social Exclusion

Schools may be one important context where adolescents learn and shape the behaviors necessary for promoting global inclusivity in adulthood. Given the importance of bystanders in halting bullying and peer aggression, the focus of this study is on both moral judgments regarding one type of bullying, social exclusion, and factors that are associated with bystander intervention. The study includes 896 adolescents, who were 6th (N = 450, M_age = 11.73), and 9th (N = 446, M_age = 14.82) graders, approximately evenly divided by gender. Participants were primarily European–American (63.3%). Results revealed that girls and participants who perceived better relationships between students and teachers were more likely to judge exclusion to be wrong. Further, ethnic minority participants, those who were more anxious about being rejected by their teachers and reported more teacher discrimination were less likely to judge exclusion as wrong. Participants who reported more positive student–teacher relationships, perceptions of a more positive school social environment and more prior experiences of teacher discrimination were more likely to report that they would seek help for the victim. On the other hand, participants who reported being more angry about teacher rejection, experiencing either peer or teacher discrimination, and perceiving they are excluded from opportunities at school were less likely to intervene to come to the aid of a peer who is being excluded. The results document the complex interplay of school and teacher factors in shaping adolescents’ bystander responses to social exclusion. Our findings suggest that positive school climate can promote intentions to intervene. However, findings indicate that adolescents who are marginalized in their school environments, and who report experiences of rejection, exclusion or discrimination are not willing or likely to intervene to prevent others from experiencing exclusion.

The importance of social-cognitive development and the developmental context for group dynamics

A developmental approach provides a unique vantage point for understanding the origins, acquisition, and nature of change regarding intergroup attitudes and behavior. Developmental research has focused predominantly on understanding and addressing negative intergroup attitudes and behaviors. We assert that group identity and group dynamics do not have to lead to discriminatory and prejudicial behavior but can actually contribute to an inclusive orientation. Moreover, these orientations do not occur in a vacuum but depend on the broader social context and the specific group distinctions. A broader social and cultural approach is important for understanding the implications of intergroup attitudes for healthy social development as well as the creation of a fair and just society.

On the psychometric properties of the aggressiveness-IAT for children and adolescents

In research on aggression, implicit association tests (IATs) have been constructed to elucidate automatic processes involved in aggressiveness. Despite an increasing number of applications of the "Aggressiveness-IAT" in basic and applied research, the psychometric properties of this method for measuring an automatic aggressive self-concept have not been comprehensively investigated. Although the Aggressiveness-IAT has been used both as a cross-situationally consistent trait measure and as a measure to indicate situational changes, prior studies have not tested to what extent it reliably captures a stable trait vs. an occasion-specific aggressive self-concept. The present research scrutinizes the psychometric properties of the Aggressiveness-IAT by addressing two issues. First, we tested the reliability, consistency, and occasion specificity of the Aggressiveness-IAT in a longitudinal panel study with four waves and 574 Austrian school children/adolescents by applying latent-state trait (LST) theory. Second, we validated latent trait scores of the IAT vis-à-vis other measures either clearly related to aggression or not. Results demonstrate that 20-30% of the variance in children's and adolescents' IAT scores is situation-unspecific (i.e., "stable"), whereas 36-50% are situation-specific. Regarding its construct validity, the Aggressiveness-IAT is correlated with explicit measures of aggression and related constructs, but it is not associated with discriminant variables (e.g., school achievement). Implications for using the Aggressiveness-IAT are discussed in the light of these findings. Aggr. Behav. 41:84-95 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.