Descriptive-to-prescriptive (D2P) reasoning: An early emerging bias to maintain the status quo

The Collaborative Nature of Testimonial Learning

Children's testimonial learning often occurs in epistemic collaborations with others. In this paper, we will discuss ways in which cultural learning emerges in social and interpersonal contexts, and is intrinsically supported and guided by children's collaborative capacities. Much work in cultural learning has focused on children's examination of speaker and model characteristics, but more recent research has investigated the interactive aspects of testimonial exchanges. We will review evidence that children (1) participate in the interpersonal commitments that are shared in testimonial transactions by way of direct address and epistemic buck passing, (2) participate in social groups that affect their selective learning in nuanced ways, and (3) may detect epistemic harms by listeners who refuse to believe sincere and accurate speakers. Implications for conceptualizing children's testimonial learning as an interactive mechanism of collaboration will be discussed.

Did Descriptive and Prescriptive Norms About Gender Equality at Home Change During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Cross-National Investigation

Using data from 15 countries, this article investigates whether descriptive and prescriptive gender norms concerning housework and child care (domestic work) changed after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results of a total of 8,343 participants (M = 19.95, SD = 1.68) from two comparable student samples suggest that descriptive norms about unpaid domestic work have been affected by the pandemic, with individuals seeing mothers' relative to fathers' share of housework and child care as even larger. Moderation analyses revealed that the effect of the pandemic on descriptive norms about child care decreased with countries' increasing levels of gender equality; countries with stronger gender inequality showed a larger difference between pre- and post-pandemic. This study documents a shift in descriptive norms and discusses implications for gender equality-emphasizing the importance of addressing the additional challenges that mothers face during health-related crises.

Condemned or valued: Young children evaluate nonconformity based on nonconformists' group orientations

Nonconformity--the act of deviating from established norms and expectations of one's group--is often evaluated negatively, despite its potential benefits for society. Three preregistered studies (N = 153) examined how nonconformists' group orientations (attitudes and intentions toward ingroup and outgroups) might affect 4-6-year-olds' evaluations of nonconformity in intergroup situations. Study 1 examined children's default beliefs of nonconformists' group attitudes toward ingroup and outgroup. We found that children expected nonconformists to hold more positive attitudes toward their outgroup than toward their ingroup, and this expectation predicted their disapproval of nonconformity. In Study 2, however, when nonconformity was explicitly motivated by positive intentions toward the ingroup rather than toward the outgroup, children were more accepting of nonconformity. Study 3 found that among nonconformists with different types of group orientations (positive toward the outgroup, ingroup or both group), young children evaluated the most positively nonconformists who bring the ingroup and the outgroup together. Collectively, these findings suggest that children evaluate nonconformity based on nonconformists' group orientations, illuminating one mechanism for how nonconformity could be more socially accepted and valued.

The effect of group status on children's hierarchy-reinforcing beliefs

Members of advantaged groups are more likely than members of disadvantaged groups to think, feel, and behave in ways that reinforce their group's position within the hierarchy. This study examined how children's status within a group-based hierarchy shapes their beliefs about the hierarchy and the groups that comprise it in ways that reinforce the hierarchy. To do this, we randomly assigned children (4-8 years; N = 123; 75 female, 48 male; 21 Asian, 9 Black, 21 Latino/a, 1 Middle-Eastern/North-African, 14 multiracial, 41 White, 16 not-specified) to novel groups that differed in social status (advantaged, disadvantaged, neutral third-party) and assessed their beliefs about the hierarchy. Across five separate assessments, advantaged-group children were more likely to judge the hierarchy to be fair, generalizable, and wrong to challenge and were more likely to hold biased intergroup attitudes and exclude disadvantaged group members. In addition, with age, children in both the advantaged- and disadvantaged-groups became more likely to see membership in their own group as inherited, while at the same time expecting group-relevant behaviors to be determined more by the environment. With age, children also judged the hierarchy to be more unfair and expected the hierarchy to generalize across contexts. These findings provide novel insights into how children's position within hierarchies can contribute to the formation of hierarchy-reinforcing beliefs. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: A total of 123 4-8-year-olds were assigned to advantaged, disadvantaged, and third-party groups within a hierarchy and were assessed on seven hierarchy-reinforcing beliefs about the hierarchy. Advantaged children were more likely to say the hierarchy was fair, generalizable, and wrong to challenge and to hold intergroup biases favoring advantaged group members. With age, advantaged- and disadvantaged-group children held more essentialist beliefs about membership in their own group, but not the behaviors associated with their group. Results suggest that advantaged group status can shape how children perceive and respond to the hierarchies they are embedded within.

Being from a highly resourced context predicts believing that others are highly resourced: An early developing worldview that stymies resource sharing

We tested whether children's and adults' resource levels predicted their beliefs about resources (Study 1) and whether those beliefs shaped their willingness to share their resources with others (Study 2). In Study 1, we found that among adults (n = 230, 59.1% female, 72.6% White) and young children (n = 109, 4-6 years old, 56% female, 33% White), increased resource level predicted increases in the belief that others have lots of resources. In Study 2, we found that adults (n = 495, 52.5% female, 69.1% White) and young children (n = 154, 4-5 years old, 52.6% female, 36.4% White) randomly assigned to believe that others have lots of resources were less likely to share their own resources with others. Implications for reducing economic inequality are discussed.

A systemic approach to the psychology of racial bias within individuals and society

Historically, the field of psychology has focused on racial biases at an individual level, considering the effects of various stimuli on individual racial attitudes and biases. This approach has provided valuable information, but not enough focus has been placed on the systemic nature of racial biases. In this Review, we examine the bidirectional relation between individual-level racial biases and broader societal systems through a systemic lens. We argue that systemic factors operating across levels - from the interpersonal to the cultural - contribute to the production and reinforcement of racial biases in children and adults. We consider the effects of five systemic factors on racial biases in the USA: power and privilege disparities, cultural narratives and values, segregated communities, shared stereotypes and nonverbal messages. We discuss evidence that these factors shape individual-level racial biases, and that individual-level biases shape systems and institutions to reproduce systemic racial biases and inequalities. We conclude with suggestions for interventions that could limit the effects of these influences and discuss future directions for the field.

Girls Are Better Students but Boys Will Be More Successful at Work: Discordance Between Academic and Career Gender Stereotypes in Middle Childhood

Despite findings of female advantages at school, men still are higher achieving in the workplace. Only a small amount of research has simultaneously investigated stereotypes of these different domains. We investigated whether stereotypes about academic female superiority and paradoxical stereotypes about workplace male superiority coexist. Participants were 1144 Grades 1-6 students (M_age = 9.66) from Hong Kong. They completed measures of academic gender stereotypes and meta-stereotypes, career gender stereotypes, career-related motivation for school excellence, and school engagement. Teachers provided school exam scores. We examined (1) gender and age differences, (2) the relationship between the stereotypes, and (3) the moderating role of these stereotypes in gender differences in school engagement, exam scores, and career-related motivation. Both boys and girls perceived girls as better students but a belief in female superiority did not translate to the career domain. Although both boys and girls beginning primary school believed their gender was superior in both domains, those at the end of primary school believed that girls do better at school while men are more successful at work. Also, at the end of primary school, these two stereotypes were more discordant on the individual level, i.e., the tendency for children who believed that girls perform better at school to also believe that women perform better at work was weaker in older children. Academic gender stereotypes moderated gender differences in school engagement and exam scores. Understanding why children hold discordant beliefs about success in different arenas and combating both academic and career stereotypes early may help improve gender equality for both genders.

Beyond enjoyment: Young children consider the normative goodness of activity engagement when attributing happiness

Individuals are typically happy when engaging in enjoyable activities. But many enjoyable activities could be harmful when engaged in to excess. Do children consider the normative goodness of activity engagement levels when attributing happiness? To examine this question, we presented children with enjoyable activities that are often harmless in moderation but harmful in excess. When told that engaging in their favorite activities at their preferred amount was either normatively good (i.e., harmless and permitted) or normatively bad (i.e., harmful and forbidden), 10- and 11-year-old and 7- and 8-year-old children (Study 1) and even 5-year-old children (Studies 2 and 3 with simplified methods) attributed less happiness when the engagement level was normatively bad than when it was normatively good both to themselves and to another child. Young children also perceived normatively bad engagement as less interesting and pleasurable (Study 3). The findings suggest that children consider the normative goodness of activity engagement (rather than enjoyment alone) when attributing happiness, illuminating how children understand happiness.

Understanding the value of telescopic testimony: With age, a predominantly White Midwestern sample of children credits knowledge to speakers whose statements go beyond the evidence

One primary value of testimony lies in its ability to extend our powers of observation. Do children credit more knowledge to speakers whose testimony goes beyond firsthand observation? The current study investigated 3- to 8-year-old children's (N = 180) and adults' (N = 20) knowledge attributions to speakers who made claims regarding perceptually evident features of a novel animal (e.g., "is brown") or claims regarding perceptually absent features (e.g., "eats insects"). By 7 years of age, children and adults attributed more knowledge to speakers who discussed telescopic information and generalized their knowledge to other domains. Because the knowledge base of child listeners expands with age, they place increased value on telescopic information and the speakers who provide it.

The roles of group membership and social exclusion in children's testimonial learning

Here, we used high- and low-stakes testimonial learning tasks to better understand two important types of social influence on children's learning decisions: group membership and social ostracism. Children (4- and 5-year-olds; N = 100) were either included or excluded by in-group or outgroup members in an online ball tossing game. Then, children were asked to selectively learn new information from either an in-group or out-group member. They also received counterintuitive information from an in-group or out-group member that was in conflict with their own intuitions. When learning new information, children who were excluded were more likely to selectively trust information from their in-group member. In contrast, when accepting counterintuitive information, children relied only on group membership regardless of their exclusion status. Together, these findings demonstrate ways in which different forms of testimonial learning are guided not only by epistemic motivations but also by social motivations of affiliation and maintaining relationships with others.