Minority- and majority-status bystander reactions to, and reasoning about, intergroup social exclusion

They Are Not All the Same: Defenders of Ethnically Victimized Adolescents

Developing a comprehensive understanding of adolescents' defending behaviors in peer victimization incidents is crucial, as these behaviors are instrumental in preventing victimization in schools. Despite recent efforts to examine various defender subgroups and their characteristics, the heterogeneity in defending behaviors within the context of ethnic victimization remains unclear. To address this gap in knowledge, the current study examined naturally occurring subgroups of defenders in ethnic victimization incidents and investigated whether these subgroups differ in their socio-cognitive skills, class norms, and social status within peer relationships. The sample included adolescents in Sweden (N = 1065; Mage = 13.12, SD = 0.41; 44.5% females). Cluster analysis yielded four distinct subgroups: victim-oriented defenders (41.3%), hybrid defenders (23.5%), bully-oriented defenders (9.8%), and non-defenders (25.4%). Hybrid and victim-oriented defenders had higher levels of perspective taking skills and positive attitudes toward immigrants than non-defenders. All three defender subgroups perceived their classroom climate as more socially cohesive than non-defenders. All four subgroups did not significantly differ in their peer status. These findings emphasize the importance of fostering inclusive class norms and implementing classroom practices that facilitate the development of perspective taking skills among students. Such effort can enhance adolescents' active defending behaviors in instances of ethnic victimization.

Why step in? Shifting justifications for bystander behaviors through interventions with youth in the Middle East

Research shows positive bystander intervention effectively mitigates bullying experiences. Yet, more evidence regarding bystander responses to bias-based social exclusion (BSE) is needed in intergroup contexts, especially in the majority world and in areas of intractable conflict. This study assessed the effectiveness of skills and skills + contact-based interventions for BSE among 148 Palestinian Citizens of Israel (Mage = 10.55) and 154 Jewish-Israeli (Mage = 10.54) early adolescents (Girls = 52.32%) in Tel Aviv-Yafo. Bystander responses were assessed by participants' reactions to hypothetical BSE scenarios over three time points. Repeated measures ANOVAs revealed both interventions significantly increased positive and decreased negative bystander responses, with changes maintained at the follow-up. The opposite result pattern emerged for the control group. Findings suggest that both interventions can effectively encourage youth to publicly challenge BSE, even amidst intractable conflict.

Validation of the multidimensional bystander responses to racist hate speech scale and its association with empathy and moral disengagement among adolescents

Our understanding of how bystanders respond to hate speech is limited. This may be due, in part, to the lack of available measurement tools. However, understanding adolescents' responses to hate speech is critical because this kind of research can support schools in empowering students to exhibit courageous moral behavior. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the newly developed Multidimensional Bystander Responses to Hate Speech Scale (MBRHS) and to explore demographic differences and correlates of bystander behavior in school hate speech. The sample consisted of 3225 seventh to ninth graders from Germany and Switzerland. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported a model with seven factors. We found that adolescents with immigrant background and boys showed particularly unfavorable response patterns. In addition, our study suggests that empathy is positively correlated with the factors comforting the victim, seeking help at school, and countering hate speech but negatively correlated with helplessness, revenge, reinforcing, and ignoring. Moral disengagement showed the opposite correlational pattern. The findings indicate that the MBRHS is a psychometrically valid and reliable measure that could aid in measuring varied responses to hate speech. In addition, this work highlights the relevance of empathy and moral engagement training in anti-hate speech prevention programs.

What motivates adolescent bystanders to intervene when immigrant youth are bullied?

Pathways to bystander responses were examined in both generalized and bias-based bullying incidents involving immigrant-origin victims. Participants were 168 (M_age  = 14.54, 57% female) adolescents of immigrant (37.5%) and nonimmigrant backgrounds, who responded to their likelihood of intervening on behalf of either an Arab or Latine victim. Models tested whether contact with immigrants and one's desires for social contact with immigrant-origin peers mediated the effects of individual (shared immigrant background, and discriminatory tendencies) and situational (inclusive peer norms) intergroup factors on active bystander responses. Findings indicated that desires for social contact reliably mediated effects across both victims; however, contact with immigrant peers was only associated with responses to Latine victims. Implications for how to promote bystander intervention are discussed.

Imagined and extended contact experiences and adolescent bystanders' behavioral intentions in homophobic bullying episodes

Bystanders' helping interventions in bias-based bullying are rare, although they have the potential to intervene on behalf of the victim and quickly stop the aggression. Two studies tested, experimentally, the impact of adolescents' imagined (Study 1, N = 113, M_age  = 16.17) and extended contact experiences (Study 2, N = 174, M_age  = 15.79) on assertive bystanders' behavioral intentions in the context of homophobic bullying, an under-researched but highly detrimental behavior that emerges mainly during early adolescence. Potential mediators (empathic concern, social contagion concerns, and masculinity/femininity threat) were also examined. Results showed that female younger participants revealed more behavioral intentions to help victims of homophobic bullying when asked to imagine an interaction with an outgroup member (Study 1). Younger participants revealed less masculinity/femininity threat in the positive extended contact condition, and female participants revealed less empathic concern in the negative extended contact condition (Study 2). Overall, these findings identify specific conditions (e.g., younger females) where indirect contact interventions (i.e., extended and imagined) are likely to have a stronger impact. Age and sex differences were found to illustrate how adolescents vary in their behavioral intentions, empathic concern, and threat; and also highlight the need to further examine age and sex differences regarding responses to homophobic bullying episodes.

Do Adolescents Intervene in Intergroup Bias-based Bullying? Bystander Judgments and Responses to Intergroup Bias-based Bullying of Refugees

This study examined 587 Turkish adolescents' (M_age  = 13.14, SD = 1.61) judgments and bystander responses towards hypothetical intragroup interpersonal (Turkish victim) and intergroup bias-based (Syrian refugee victim) bullying. Intergroup factors and social-cognitive skills were assessed as predictors. Findings revealed that adolescents were less likely to see bullying as acceptable and less likely to explicitly support the bully in intragroup interpersonal bullying compared to intergroup bias-based bullying. Further, adolescents with higher theory of mind and empathy were more likely to evaluate intergroup bias-based bullying as less acceptable and more likely to challenge the bully. Adolescents' prejudice and discrimination towards refugees were predictors of bystander judgments and responses to intergroup bias-based bullying. This study provides implications for anti-bullying intervention programs.

Being considered a co-national: Social categorization and perceived acculturation of immigrant peers

With increasing immigration, it is increasingly important to understand whether and when children consider immigrant peers as co-nationals. Using an experimental design, we examined among native-born preadolescents (8-13 years of age) in the Netherlands whether and when they perceive immigrant peers as co-nationals. First, and in agreement with the social categorization account, we expected that the use of dual identity (vs single ethnic identity) labels for immigrant peers leads to stronger co-nationality perceptions and a related stronger desire for close social contact. Second, and in line with the acculturation account, we expected that an early age of arrival in the country (vs a later age of arrival) leads to stronger perceived co-nationality and related contact desire. The findings support the acculturation account, especially among native-born children with higher national identification. There was no evidence for the social categorization account.

Challenging the exclusion of immigrant peers

The present study examined age-related differences in bystander reactions within the context of peer exclusion of national ingroup (British) and immigrant outgroup (Australian or Turkish) peers. The immigrant peers were from nations that varied in terms of their perceived intergroup status in Britain. Participants were British children ( n = 110, 8–11 years) and adolescents ( n = 193, 13–16 years) who were presented with one of three scenarios in which a British national, Australian immigrant, or Turkish immigrant peer was excluded by a British peer group. Participants indicated their bystander responses. Perceived similarity and bystander self-efficacy were examined as possible correlates of bystander reactions. Findings revealed that children were more likely to directly challenge the social exclusion when the excluded peer was British or Australian compared with when they were Turkish. In contrast, adolescents did not differentiate in their response—they were equally likely to directly challenge the exclusion regardless of the excluded peer’s nationality. Importantly, when the excluded peer was Turkish, moderated mediation analysis showed that, with age, there was higher bystander self-efficacy for challenging the exclusions. In turn, higher bystander self-efficacy was related to higher direct challenging. These novel findings demonstrate the importance of intergroup relations, perceived similarity, and bystander self-efficacy in the emergence of age-related differences in bystander reactions to the exclusion of immigrant peers.

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.

British Adolescents Are More Likely Than Children to Support Bystanders Who Challenge Exclusion of Immigrant Peers

The present study examined British children’s and adolescents’ individual and perceived group evaluations of a challenger when a member of one’s own group excludes a British national or an immigrant newcomer to the school (Turkish or Australian) from participating in a group activity. Participants included British children (n = 110, M_{age in years} = 9.69, SD = 1.07, 44 girls, aged 8–11) and adolescents (n = 193, M_{age in years} = 14.16, SD = 0.92, 104 girls, aged 13–16), who were inducted into their group and heard hypothetical scenarios in which a member of their own group expressed a desire to exclude the newcomer from joining their activity. Subsequently, participants heard that another member of the ingroup challenged the exclusionary act by stating that they should be inclusive. Children’s and adolescents’ individual evaluations of the bystander who challenged the social exclusion of an immigrant peer were more positive than their perceived group evaluations, recognizing that groups are often exclusionary. Only adolescents but not children differed in their individual and perceived group evaluations in the social exclusion of British peers. When the newcomer was an immigrant peer, adolescents were more likely to evaluate the challenger positively in both their individual and perceived group evaluations compared to children. Further, children, compared to adolescents, were more likely to reason about social and group norms to justify their evaluations only when the excluded peer was an immigrant but not when the excluded peer was British. Adolescents were more likely to reason about fairness, rights, and equality. The findings indicate that exclusionary group norms surrounding immigrants begin in childhood. Interventions that focus on changing group norms to be more inclusive could be effective in reducing prejudicial attitudes toward immigrants in childhood.

Theory of Mind as a Correlate of Bystanders' Reasoning About Intergroup Bullying of Syrian Refugee Youth

The current study examined how ingroup and outgroup Theory of Mind (ToM) predicts children’s and adolescents’ reasoning for their acceptability judgments of intergroup bullying of Syrian refugee peers and group support of intergroup bullying. Participants included 587 Turkish middle (n = 372, M_age = 12.19, SD = 1.01; 208 girls) and high school (n = 215, M_age = 14.81, SD = 0.97; 142 girls) students. Participants read a bias-based bullying story with a Syrian refugee peer targeted by an ingroup Turkish peer. Then, participants rated the acceptability of bullying and group support of bullying and were presented with a reasoning question (Why?) after each acceptability question (bullying and group support of bullying). Reasoning codes included Fairness, Refugee Status/War, Prejudice and Discrimination, Harm, Prescriptive Norms, Group Functioning, and Relationship with the Bully. Participants’ ingroup and outgroup ToM abilities (measured using the Strange Stories) were evaluated as predictors of reasoning. Results documented that middle school students were more likely to attribute mental states to their ingroup members compared to outgroup members while high school students’ ToM performance did not differ across contexts. Further, the more unacceptable participants judged bullying to be, the more they reasoned about the bullying by referencing fairness, refugee status, discrimination, and harm. Results also documented that ingroup and outgroup ToM were positively related to attribution to fairness and participants’ usage of multiple reasoning judgments while only outgroup ToM was a significant predictor of reasoning around refugee status/war, discrimination, and prejudice. The findings provide implications for intervention programs that tackle intergroup bullying by examining bystanders’ social cognitive skills in a specific context.

Promoting Fair and Just School Environments: Developing Inclusive Youth

Incidents of prejudice and discrimination in K-12 schools have increased over the past decade around the world, including the U.S. In 2018, more than two-thirds of the 2,776 U.S. educators surveyed reported witnessing a hate or bias incident in their school. Children and adolescents who experience prejudice, social exclusion and discrimination are subject to compromised well-being and low academic achievement. Few educators feel prepared to incorporate this topic into the education curriculum. Given the long-term harm related to experiencing social exclusion and discrimination, school districts need to create positive school environments and directly address prejudice and bias. Several factors are currently undermining progress in this area. First, national debates in the U.S. and other countries has politicized the topic of creating fair and just school environments. Second, the Covid pandemic has interrupted children's and adolescents' education by halting academic progress which has particularly negatively affected students from marginalized and ethnic/racial minority backgrounds. Third, teachers have experienced significant stress during Covid-19 with an increase in anxiety around virtual instruction and communication with parents. Three strategies recommended to address these converging problems include creating inclusive and non-discriminatory policies for schools, promoting opportunities for intergroup contact and mutual respect, and implementing evidence-based, developmentally appropriate education programs designed to reduce prejudice, increase ethnic and racial identity, and promote equity, fairness and justice in school environments.