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

"But the poor needed it more": Children's judgments on procedural justice to allocate resources between two candidates equal in merit, different in need

The current study investigated children's judgments on procedural justice and its outcomes when the candidates were equal in merit but different in need. A total of 88 children (41 girls and 47 boys) aged 7 to 11 years were individually interviewed (M_age = 8 years 9 months, SD = 14.065 months). Results showed that, regardless of age, children tended to give educational resources to the resource-poor candidates. However, children's welfare consideration of the resource-poor candidates increased with age. Children also made differentiated judgments based on the resource type and treated educational materials as more necessary than educational experiences. Children's age and socioeconomic status (SES) were associated with this differentiation. Younger and high-SES children were more likely to view the outcome of procedural justice (i.e., drawing a stick) for allocating an educational experience (i.e., summer camp) as fair when the result favored the resource-rich candidate. Overall, findings revealed that children do not use a unitary form of fairness in the procedural justice context. The shift from strict equality to welfare concerns continues to develop over middle childhood.

Claims of wrongdoing by outgroup members heighten children's ingroup biases

Little is known about how group bias may impact children's acceptance of unsubstantiated claims. Most children view cheating as unfair. However, in competitive situations, when ambiguity surrounds the potential intention to cheat, group affiliation may lead children to support claims of cheating based solely on the team affiliation of the claimant, even when those claims are not clearly substantiated. Therefore, it may be particularly important to consider the role ingroup bias may play in children's accusations of cheating in a competitive intergroup context. The current study investigated 4-10 year old children's (N = 137, M_Age = 6.71 years, SD_Age = 1.49; 47 % female) evaluations of ambiguous acts and unverified claims about those acts in a competitive, intergroup context. Results showed that children initially viewed an ambiguous act similarly, regardless of team affiliation, but demonstrated increasing ingroup biases after claims of wrongdoing were introduced. Implications for how unsubstantiated claims may impact intergroup interactions more broadly will be discussed.

Socioeconomic status biases among children and adolescents: The role of school diversity and teacher beliefs in Nepal

Investigating socioeconomic status (SES) biases, Nepalese children and adolescents (N = 605, 52% girls, M_age  = 13.21, SD_age  = 1.74) attending schools that varied by SES composition were asked to anticipate whether a peer would include a high or low SES character as a math partner. Novel findings were that students attending mixed SES schools were more likely to expect inclusion of a low SES character than were students attending high SES schools. With age, high SES participants attending mixed SES schools increasingly expected the inclusion of the low SES character. Moreover, teachers' democratic beliefs in high SES schools predicted inclusive expectations. Teacher beliefs and school diversity play a significant role for fostering students' inclusivity in educational contexts.

Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Reduction: Prospects and Challenges in Changing Youth Attitudes

Intergroup contact has long been lauded as a key intervention to reduce prejudice and improve intergroup attitudes among youth. In this review, we summarize classic perspectives and new developments in the intergroup contact literature, highlighting both prospects and challenges associated with achieving desired youth outcomes through contact. First, we review literature showing how positive intergroup outcomes can be facilitated through cultivating optimal conditions for contact, as well as by attending to youth’s emotional responses to contact. We then discuss how desired contact outcomes may be inhibited by limited understanding of ways in which contact strategies may affect youth across developmental stages, as well as by limited focus on societal inequalities and intergroup conflict, which require examination of outcomes beyond prejudice reduction. We also review growing bodies of research on indirect contact strategies—such as extended contact, vicarious contact, and online contact—showing many options that can be used to promote positive relations among youth from diverse backgrounds, beyond the contact literature’s traditional focus on face-to-face interaction. We conclude this review by acknowledging how understanding both prospects and challenges associated with implementing contact strategies can enhance our capacity to prepare youth to embrace group differences and build more inclusive societies.

Adolescents' own and parental expectations for cross-group friendship in the context of societal inequalities

This study investigated adolescents' own and parental expectations about cross-group friendships between peers from different socio-economic status (SES). Nepalese adolescents (N = 389, M _age = 14.08; grades: 7-10) evaluated an ambiguous peer encounter between a low and a high SES peer. Overall, adolescents attributed negative intentions to high-SES more than to low-SES peers. Most adolescents expected that high- and low-SES targets could not be friends, that parents of high-SES targets would disapprove of cross-group friendships, referencing social hierarchies and reputation, and that parents of low-SES targets would support friendship citing moral concerns and social mobility. Most adolescents were aware of systemic reasons that underlie SES biases. Given that low SES adolescents often suffer when excluded from peer experiences, these findings indicate that parental socialization strategies should focus not only on protecting children from experiences of discrimination but also from experiences related to social inequalities and a lack of social mobility.

Group Identity and Ingroup Bias: The Social Identity Approach

This article discusses the social identity approach (social identity theory and self-categorization theory) for understanding children’s ingroup biases in attitudes and behaviors. It is argued that developmental research on ingroup bias will be enhanced by more fully considering the implications of this approach. These implications include (a) the conceptualization of group identity, (b) the importance of social reality and children’s epistemic motivation, (c) the role of processes of normative influence and social projection, and (d) the relevance of moral considerations. These four implications have not been fully considered in the developmental literature but indicate that the social identity approach offers the possibility for theoretically integrating and empirically examining various processes involved in children’s ingroup biases.

The Assaultive Staff Action Program (ASAP): Thirty Year Program Analysis

The Assaulted Staff Action Program (ASAP) is a voluntary, system-wide, peer-help, crisis intervention program to address the psychological sequellae in staff victims of patient assaults. Its functions and service provisions have been reported in previous five-year intervals. ASAP has been associated with providing quality counseling services to employee victims of these patient assaults as well as declines in assaults facility-wide in some agencies after an ASAP team was fielded. The present paper presents a summary of both its most recent five-year interval (2015-2020) and an overview of its 30 years of service during which it has responded to 10,651 patient assaults on staff.

Acceptance of outgroup members in schools: Developmental trends and roles of perceived norm of prejudice and teacher support

BACKGROUND

Schools around the world are increasingly diverse in ethnicity. Given the importance of peer acceptance in children's well-being and development, it is a pressing concern for educators to promote intergroup acceptance in schools.

AIMS

First, to examine the developmental trends of acceptance of outgroup members in both the ethnic minority and majority students. Second, to investigate how outgroup acceptance is subject to the interplay between perceived norm of prejudice, a risk factor in the macrosystem, and teacher support, a protective factor in the microsystem.

SAMPLE

The participants were 3,723 students (ethnic majority: 61%; boys: 51.9%; mean age: 13.7) at Grade 2, 5, 8, and 11 from 24 schools in Hong Kong.

METHODS

The students were asked to complete a battery of questionnaires regarding their willingness to accept outgroup members in schools, perceived societal norm of prejudice against ethnic minority group, and teacher support they received in schools.

RESULTS

It was found that ethnic minority students accepted outgroup members more than ethnic majority students accepted them. The difference was primarily driven by the low outgroup acceptance of ethnic majority students in Grades 2 and 5. The results of multi-level analysis revealed that outgroup acceptance was associated negatively with perceived norm of prejudice but positively with teacher support. The negative association between outgroup acceptance and perceived norm of prejudice was attenuated in schools with supportive culture.

CONCLUSIONS

The results point to the need of early intervention and the importance of cultivating school culture with strong social emotional support.

Social inclusion and exclusion in same-race and interracial peer encounters

This study investigated children's and adolescents' predictions of inclusion and evaluations of exclusion in interracial and same-race peer contexts. The sample (N = 246) consisted of African American (n = 115) and European American (n = 131) children and adolescents who judged the likelihood of including a new peer, evaluated the group's decision to exclude the new peer, and provided reasons for their judgments. European American participants, particularly adolescents, viewed same-race inclusion as more likely than interracial inclusion. In contrast, African American participants viewed interracial and same-race inclusion to be just as likely, and evaluated all forms of exclusion to be more wrong than did their European American counterparts. The findings are discussed with respect to peer messages about interracial peer encounters and the conditions that are necessary for prejudice reduction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Children's Perceptions of Economic Groups in a Context of Limited Access to Opportunities

Children (N = 267, ages 8-14 years, M = 11.61 years, middle to upper-middle income) made predictions regarding groups of same-aged peers from high-wealth and low-wealth backgrounds. The context involved granting access to a special opportunity. From middle childhood to early adolescence children increasingly expected both high- and low-wealth groups to want access to opportunities for their own group. However, children viewed high-wealth groups as motivated in part by selfishness and low-wealth groups as concerned in part with broader economic inequality. Finally, the higher children's family income, the more they expected group-serving tendencies. These findings revealed children's perceptions of exclusive preferences between economic groups, negative stereotypes about high-wealth children, and awareness of some of the constraints faced by low-wealth children.

Expectations for Cross-Ethnic Inclusion by Asian America Children and Adolescents

Asian American youth’s inclusion decisions were investigated in cross-ethnic peer contexts (Asian and non-Asian). Ten-, 13-, and 16-year-old participants ( N = 134), enrolled in U.S. schools, decided whether to include a same-ethnic peer with different interests or a different-ethnic peer with similar interests. Findings showed that with age, participants more frequently included a peer who shared interests even when this peer was not of the same ethnicity. Participants expected their peer groups to be equally inclusive of others of both ethnic backgrounds, and expected that in-group parents would be less inclusive of cross-ethnic peers. In addition, adolescents expected parents to have prejudicial attitudes about ethnic out-group members. Views about peer group and in-group parents’ inclusivity diverged from adolescents’ own inclusivity. These findings point to areas for intervention regarding the promotion of cross-group friendships and the reduction of prejudice.

Children's and Adolescents' Evaluations of Intergroup Exclusion in Interracial and Interwealth Peer Contexts

Children and adolescents (N = 153, ages 8-14 years, M_age  = 11.46 years) predicted and evaluated peer exclusion in interwealth (high-wealth and low-wealth) and interracial (African American and European American) contexts. With age, participants increasingly expected high-wealth groups to be more exclusive than low-wealth groups, regardless of their depicted race. Furthermore, children evaluated interwealth exclusion less negatively than interracial exclusion, and children who identified as higher in wealth evaluated interwealth exclusion less negatively than did children who identified as lower in wealth. Children cited explicit negative stereotypes about high-wealth groups in their justifications, while rarely citing stereotypes about low-wealth groups or racial groups. Results revealed that both race and wealth are important factors that children consider when evaluating peer exclusion.

Effort or outcome? Children's meritorious decisions

How individuals determine what is fair and just when allocating resources is a fundamental aspect of moral development. Decisions about fairness involve considerations such as merit, which includes effort (one's own exertion to achieve a goal) and outcome (one's product). Previous research has described merit in terms of both effort and outcome (e.g., a meritorious individual is both hard-working and productive). Crucially, no research has documented whether children give priority to being hard-working (high effort) or to being productive (high outcome or product) when allocating resources. This gap in the literature obfuscates two constructs that reflect how individuals allocate resources. The current study examined this process by which children (3- to 10-year-olds, N = 100; M_age = 7.27 years, SD = 2.39) weighed these two different aspects of merit in their fairness decisions in several situations where levels of effort and outcome were varied. When there was a discrepancy between effort and outcome, children increasingly prioritized effort over outcome with age and allocated more resources to hard-working peers than to productive peers. Effort and outcome were also examined. In situations where only effort varied (i.e., outcome was controlled), with age children were more likely to incorporate effort into their fairness decisions; however, in situations where only outcome varied (i.e., effort was controlled), with age children were less likely to incorporate effort into their fairness decisions. Taken together, the findings suggest that as children get older, they increasingly focus on effort of individuals rather than on their productivity when distributing resources.

Interwealth Contact and Young Children's Concern for Equity

This study examined young children's contact with individuals of high-wealth and low-wealth backgrounds and their behavior toward peers of these backgrounds in a resource distribution task. The sample included 72 ethnically diverse higher income children (M_age  = 6.68 years, SD = 0.98 years). Contact with individuals of low-wealth backgrounds (interwealth contact) affected children's behavior indirectly, through social-cognitive reasoning processes. The more interwealth contact children reported, the more likely they were to reason about access to resources rather than their own wealth preferences in this context. This reasoning, in turn, was associated with more resources allocated to a low-wealth peer relative to a high-wealth peer. Thus, interwealth contact early in development was associated with more equitable peer interactions.

A Developmental Perspective on the Origins of Morality in Infancy and Early Childhood

Key constituents of morality emerge during the first 4 years of life. Recent research with infants and toddlers holds a promise to explain the origins of human morality. This article takes a constructivist approach to the acquisition of morality, and makes three main proposals. First, research on moral development needs an explicit definition of morality. Definitions are crucial for scholarly communication and for settling empirical questions. Second, researchers would benefit from eschewing the dichotomy between innate and learned explanations of morality. Based on work on developmental biology, we propose that all developmental transitions involve both genetic and environmental factors. Third, attention is needed to developmental changes, alongside continuities, in the development of morality from infancy through childhood. Although infants and toddlers show behaviors that resemble the morally relevant behaviors of older children and adults, they do not judge acts as morally right or wrong until later in childhood. We illustrate these points by discussing the development of two phenomena central to morality: Orientations toward helping others and developing concepts of social equality. We assert that a constructivist approach will help to bridge research on infants and toddlers with research on moral developmental later in childhood and into adulthood.

Young people's reasoning about exclusion in novel groups

This study examined children's and adolescents' reasoning about the exclusion of others in peer and school contexts. Participants (80 8-year-olds, 85 11-year-olds, 74 14-year-olds, and 73 20-year-olds) were asked to judge and reason about the acceptability of exclusion from novel groups by children and school principals. Three contexts for exclusion between two groups were systematically varied: unequal economic status, geographical location, and a control (no reason provided for group differences). Regardless of condition, participants believed that exclusion was less acceptable in peer contexts than in school contexts and when children were excluded rather than principals. Participants also used more moral and less social conventional reasoning for peer contexts than for school contexts. In terms of condition, whereas 8-year-olds rated exclusion based on unequal economic status as less acceptable than exclusion based on geographical location or no reason when enacted by a principal, 14-year-olds rated the unequal economic condition as more acceptable than the other two contexts. The 11- and 20-year-olds did not distinguish economic status differences. The findings suggest that children and adolescents are sensitive to context and take multiple variables into account, including the type of group difference (socioeconomic status or other reasons), authority status of the perpetrator of exclusion, and setting (school or peer group). Patterns may have differed from past research because of the sociocultural context in which exclusion was embedded and the contexts of group differences.

Children's Perceptions of Social Resource Inequality

Children's perceptions of social resource inequalities were investigated by measuring spontaneous explanations for race-based disparities in access to societal resources. Fifth graders (N = 139, M = 11.14 years, SD = .61 years) viewed animated vignettes depicting hypothetical resource inequalities between institutions serving children of African-American and European-American background. Children frequently explained disparities in terms of institutions' differing financial resources, revealing awareness that economic inequalities often underlie groups' differential access to societal resources. Further, children attributed inequalities to preferential treatment more often when they witnessed African-Americans at a disadvantage than when they witnessed European-Americans at a disadvantage, demonstrating awareness that racial minority groups are more likely to experience restricted access to resources. Finally, children who reasoned about preferential treatment judged inequality, and actions that perpetuated inequality, more negatively than children who attributed inequalities to institutions' differing needs, revealing a link between awareness of discrimination and rejection of social inequalities.

Young children's inclusion decisions in moral and social-conventional group norm contexts

Being a member of a peer group involves making decisions about whom to include in or exclude from the group. Sometimes these decisions are related to whether members of the group support or challenge the norms of the group. To examine how young children weigh concerns for group norms and group membership in both moral and social-conventional norm contexts, children (3- to 6-year-olds; N=73) were asked to decide between including an ingroup member who challenged the group's norm or an outgroup member who supported the norm. Groups held either moral (equal or unequal resource allocation) or social-conventional (traditional or nontraditional) norms. In the moral contexts, children were more likely to include the peer who advocated for the moral concern for equality regardless of the peer's group membership or their group's specific norm. In the social-conventional contexts, however, children were more likely to include the peer who advocated for the conventional concern for maintaining traditions but only at the group-specific level. Furthermore, with age children increasingly based their inclusion decisions on normative concerns, rather than on group membership concerns, and differed in their inclusion decisions for ingroups and outgroups. Finally, children reasoned about their decisions by referencing concerns for fairness, group norms, and group membership, suggesting that preschool children weigh multiple concerns when deciding whom to include in their groups. Overall, the current study revealed differences in how preschool children weigh moral and social-conventional concerns in intergroup contexts.

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.

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.