Adolescents view social exclusion based on social class as more wrong than do children

Psychological attitudes about social status hierarchies and social mobility often reflect stereotypic expectations about competencies and entitlements based on inequalities. Children who experience exclusion based on social class are at risk of experiencing a lack of opportunities, contributing to societal disparities. Recently, developmental science has examined the origins of attitudes that contribute to social exclusion, reflecting moral judgments about fairness as well as societal and group-based concerns about norms and intergroup dynamics. This study investigated children's reasoning about intergroup exclusion by focusing on social class as a potential exclusion criterion for children and adolescents in peer contexts in Türkiye, an understudied context for research. Participants living in a metropolitan area of Türkiye (N = 270) between the ages of 8-10 (Mage = 9.80; SD = .77; 53.5% girls) and 14-16 (Mage = 15.51; SD = .93, 61.7% girls) from lower and higher socioeconomic backgrounds were asked for their exclusion evaluations, emotion attributions, related justifications, and individual solutions. While participants overall viewed social class-based social exclusion as wrong, adolescents typically viewed it as more wrong than did children. Adolescents focused on unfair treatment and discrimination, whereas children focused on interpersonal aspects of social exclusion more frequently. Older participants from lower socioeconomic status (SES) viewed the excluders' intentions as discriminatory more often than did older participants from higher SES who desired to protect the status quo. These findings shed new light on how children and adolescents evaluate societal-based biases contributing to peer social exclusion. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Perceived contact with friends from lower socioeconomic status reduces exclusion based on social class

This study investigated children's and adolescents' reasoning about intergroup exclusion based on social class from educational opportunities in Türkiye. The role of children's and adolescents' perceived contact with friends from different socioeconomic backgrounds on their evaluations of exclusion and personal solutions to the exclusion was also examined. Participants (N = 270) included 142 children (8-10 years old, Mage = 9.80; SD = 0.82; 53.5% girls) and 128 adolescents (14-16 years old, Mage = 15.46; SD = 0.91, 61.7% girls) from lower (N = 144) and higher (N = 126) socioeconomic backgrounds. Results showed that while most participants viewed social class-based exclusion as wrong, adolescents were more likely to view it as wrong than were children. Adolescents from lower SES approached social class-based exclusion as less acceptable than did adolescents from higher SES who referred to expectations about conformity to authority and the status quo. Moderation analyses showed that for adolescents from higher SES, higher perceived contact with friends from lower SES was associated with decreased acceptability of exclusion and increased motivation to provide equity. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: Overall, adolescents living in a country with economic instability evaluated social class-based exclusion from educational opportunities among peers as unfair and wrong. Adolescents from lower SES viewed social class-based exclusion as less acceptable than did adolescents from higher SES. Adolescents from higher SES expected that excluders' intentions were motivated by conforming to authority and supporting the status quo more frequently than did children. For adolescents from higher SES, perceived contact with friends from lower SES was associated with decreased acceptability of exclusion and increased motivation to provide equity.

Adolescents' Evaluations of those who Challenge Exclusive and Inclusive Peer Norms

Early and middle adolescents' judgments and reasonings about peers who challenge exclusive and inclusive peer group norms were examined across three studies with varying intergroup contexts. Study 1 participants included (N = 199) non-Arab American participants responding to an Arab American/non-Arab American intergroup context. Study 2 included (N = 123) non-Asian and (N = 105) Asian American participants responding to an Asian/non-Asian American intergroup context. Study 3 included (N = 275) Lebanese participants responding to an American/Lebanese intergroup context. Across all three studies participants responded to ingroup and outgroup deviant group members who challenged their peer groups to either include or exclude an outgroup peer with similar interests. Findings indicated that adolescents approved of peers who challenged exclusive peer norms and advocated for inclusion of an ethnic and cultural outgroup, and disapproved of peers who challenged inclusive group norms and advocated for exclusion. Non-Arab and non-Asian American adolescents displayed ingroup bias when evaluating a deviant advocating for exclusion. Additionally, age differences were found among Asian American adolescents. Findings will be discussed in light of intergroup research on those who challenge injustices.

Developmental Perspectives on Social Inequalities and Human Rights

Social inequalities and human rights are inevitably linked to children's and adolescents' healthy development. Children who experience structural and interpersonal inequalities in access to resources and opportunities based on their gender, race, ethnicity, or other group categories are denied the right to fair treatment. We assert that investigating the psychological perspectives that children hold regarding inequalities and human rights is necessary for creating fair and just societies. We take a constructivist approach to this topic which seeks to understand how individuals interpret and evaluate observed and experienced inequalities. Even young children think about these issues. Yet, throughout development, individuals must often weigh multiple, potentially conflicting considerations when interpreting, evaluating, and responding to social inequalities and rights violations. In these complex contexts, children and adolescents are neither fully "moral" nor fully "prejudiced." Rather, critical questions for research in this area concern when, why, and for whom young people reject inequalities and support rights, and, by contrast, when, why, and for whom they accept that inequalities and rights violations should be allowed to persist. This paper provides a brief overview of how different conceptions of social inequalities and rights are intrinsically linked together.

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.

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.

Science resource inequalities viewed as less wrong when girls are disadvantaged

In response to some resource inequalities, children give priority to moral concerns. Yet, in others, children show ingroup preferences in their evaluations and resource allocations. The present study built upon this knowledge by investigating children's and young adults' (N = 144; 5-6-year-olds, M _age = 5.83, SD _age = .97; 9-11-year-olds, M _age = 10.74, SD _age = .68; and young adults, M _age = 19.92, SD _age = 1.10) evaluations and allocation decisions in a science inequality context. Participants viewed vignettes in which male and female groups received unequal amounts of science supplies, then evaluated the acceptability of the resource inequalities, allocated new boxes of science supplies between the groups, and provided justifications for their choices. Results revealed both children and young adults evaluated inequalities of science resources less negatively when girls were disadvantaged than when boys were disadvantaged. Further, 5- to 6-year-old participants and male participants rectified science resource inequalities to a greater extent when the inequality disadvantaged boys compared to when it disadvantaged girls. Generally, participants who used moral reasoning to justify their responses negatively evaluated and rectified the resource inequalities, whereas participants who used group-focused reasoning positively evaluated and perpetuated the inequalities, though some age and participant gender findings emerged. Together, these findings reveal subtle gender biases that may contribute to perpetuating gender-based science inequalities both in childhood and adulthood.

Group Norms Influence Children's Expectations About Status Based on Wealth and Popularity

Children’s understanding of status and group norms influence their expectations about social encounters. However, status is multidimensional and children may perceive status stratification (i.e., high- and low-status) differently across multiple status dimensions (i.e., wealth and popularity). The current study investigated the effect of status level and norms on children’s expectations about intergroup affiliation in wealth and popularity contexts. Participants (N = 165; age range: 5–10 years; M_age = 7.72 years) were randomly assigned to hear two scenarios where a high- or low-status target affiliated with opposite-status groups based on either wealth or popularity. In one scenario, the group expressed an inclusive norm. In the other scenario, the group expressed an exclusive norm. For each scenario, children made predictions about children’s expectations for a target to acquire social resources. Novel findings indicated that children associated wealth status to some extent, but they drew stronger inferences from the wealth dimension than from the popularity dimension. In contrast to previous evidence that children distinguish between high- and low-status groups, we did not find evidence to support this in the context of the current study. In addition, norms of exclusion diminished children’s expectations for acquiring social resources from wealth and popularity groups but this effect was more pronounced between wealth groups. We found age differences in children’s expectations in regards to norms, but not in regards to status. The implications of how these effects, in addition to lack of effects, bear on children’s expectations about acquiring resources are 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.

Testing the effectiveness of the Developing Inclusive Youth program: A multisite randomized control trial

The Developing Inclusive Youth program is a classroom‐based, individually administered video tool that depicts peer‐based social and racial exclusion, combined with teacher‐led discussions. A multisite randomized control trial was implemented with 983 participants (502 females; 58.5% White, 41.5% Ethnic/racial minority; M_age = 9.64 years) in 48 third‐, fourth‐, and fifth‐grade classrooms across six schools. Children in the program were more likely to view interracial and same‐race peer exclusion as wrong, associate positive traits with peers of different racial, ethnic, and gender backgrounds, and report play with peers from diverse backgrounds than were children in the control group. Many approaches are necessary to achieve antiracism in schools. This intervention is one component of this goal for developmental science.

To punish or exclude? Children’s responses to unfair and fair advantages created in competitive contexts

To determine whether children will exclude or punish a peer who creates an unfair advantage in an intergroup team context, four-to ten-year-old participants (N = 120, M_age = 6.87) were assigned a team membership and evaluated unintentional and intentional unfair advantages created by a character. Children were more likely to endorse punishment and exclusion responses when reasoning about an opponent than a teammate. This difference between groups was not observed when in-group and out-group members reasoned about punishing a character who intentionally created an unfair advantage. Older children were less likely to endorse exclusion than younger participants. Further, older children and in-group members utilized punishment more frequently than exclusion. Taken together this demonstrates that the group identity and the age of the child influences the ways in which children endorse responses to transgressions. These findings increase our understanding regarding children's conceptions of fairness responses to transgressions in intergroup contexts.

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.

Desire to play with counterstereotypical peers is related to gender stereotypes and playmate experiences

This study investigated the role of children's gender stereotypes and peer playmate experiences in shaping their desire to play with peers who hold counterstereotypical preferences (e.g., a boy who likes dolls or a girl who likes trucks). Children (N = 95; 46 girls, 49 boys; 67% White, 18% Black, 8% Latinx, 4% Asian, 3% other; median household income = $US97,810) who were 4 to 8 years old (M = 6.11 years old, SD = 1.34) were interviewed about their gender stereotypes about toy preferences, how often they engage in counterstereotypical playmate experiences, and their desire to play with peers who hold counterstereotypical toy preferences. Children with less gender stereotype-consistent expectations reported more playmate experiences with children who played with toys that were gender counterstereotypical compared to children with more gender stereotype-consistent expectations. Additionally, children with less gender stereotype-consistent expectations reported a greater desire to play with peers who held counterstereotypical toy preferences compared to children with more gender stereotype-consistent expectations. Younger children's reported playmate experiences with peers who liked toys that were gender counterstereotypical and their desire to play with these peers were strongly related to their gender stereotypical expectations (and more so than for older children). Together, these findings indicate that children's gender stereotypes and peer playmate experiences are related to their desire to play with peers who hold counterstereotypical toy preferences, highlighting the importance of facilitating diverse friendships for promoting inclusive orientations in childhood. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Reducing Prejudice Through Promoting Cross-Group Friendships

Around the globe, individuals are affected by exclusion, discrimination, and prejudice targeting individuals from racial, ethnic, and immigrant backgrounds as well as crimes based on gender, nationality, and culture (United Nations General Assembly, 2016). Unfortunately, children are often the targeted victims (Costello & Dillard, 2019). What is not widely understood is that the intergroup biases underlying systemic racism start long before adulthood with children displaying notable signs of intergroup bias, sometimes before entering grade school. Intergroup bias refers to the tendency to evaluate members of one’s own group more favorably than someone not identified with one’s group and is typically associated with prejudicial attitudes. Children are both the victims and the perpetrators of bias. In this review, we provide evidence of how biases emerge in childhood, along with an analysis of the significant role of intergroup friendships on enhancing children’s well-being and reducing prejudice in childhood. The review focuses predominantly on the context of race, with the inclusion of several other categories, such as nationality and religion. Fostering positive cross-group friendships in childhood helps to address the negative long-term consequences of racism, discrimination, and prejudice that emerges in childhood and continues through to adulthood.

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.

Peer and Parental Sources of Influence Regarding Interracial and Same-Race Peer Encounters

This study investigated the socializing influence of peers and parents in interracial encounters by disentangling how children and adolescents consider peer and parent messages when predicting interracial and same-race inclusion. Black and White children (9-14 years old, N = 246) predicted the likelihood of interracial and same-race peer inclusion and provided justifications for their expectations when peer and parent sources of influence were present. Results revealed that, while participants predicted that inclusion would be less likely when parent sources of influence were present than when peer sources of influence were present, the racial composition of the encounter and the race of the participant mattered only in contexts with peer sources of influence. Participants' reasoning about the benefits of inclusion and social pressure also differed when parent or peer sources were present. This study informs future research and efforts designed to improve the quality of interracial peer interactions, and for programs designed to promote positive intergroup peer relationships.

Social and Racial Justice as Fundamental Goals for the Field of Human Development

Social justice refers to promoting fairness, equality, equity and rights across multiple aspects of society, including economic, educational, and workforce opportunities. A number of scholars across academia have called for a greater incorporation of social and racial justice approaches to the field of human development, and have asserted that social justice constitutes both a theoretical framework as well as a set of hypotheses to investigate and understand the human condition. The emergence, experience, and awareness of social injustice has to be much better understood from a psychological and developmental perspective. Four areas that reflect theoretical changes in human development research are discussed: a) socialization theories about race, b) ethnic/racial identity and development, c) developmental social identity and moral reasoning, and d) lay theories and social essentialism. Childhood is a period of intense change and development; human development research is uniquely positioned to promote change that will contribute to challenging social and racial injustice.

Moral Reasoning Enables Developmental and Societal Change

Moral reasoning is an essential part of how humans develop and a fundamental aspect of how human societies change over time. On a developmental timescale, reasoning about interpersonal disagreements and dilemmas spurs age-related changes in moral judgments from childhood to adulthood. When asked to distribute resources among others, even young children strive to balance competing concerns with equality, merit, and need. Over the course of development, reasoning and judgments about resource distribution and other moral issues become increasingly sophisticated. From childhood to adulthood, individuals not only evaluate acts as right or wrong but also take the extra steps to rectify inequalities, protest unfair norms, and resist stereotypic expectations about others. The development of moral reasoning also enables change on a societal timescale. Across centuries and communities, ordinary individuals have called for societal change based on moral concerns with welfare, rights, fairness, and justice. Individuals have effectively employed reasoning to identify and challenge injustices. In this article, we synthesize recent insights from developmental science about the roles of moral reasoning in developmental and societal change. In the concluding section, we turn to questions for future research on moral reasoning and change.

Children's group identity is related to their assessment of fair and unfair advantages

Unfair advantages can be created either intentionally (e.g., cheating) or unintentionally (e.g., unintended benefit). Little is known regarding how children evaluate different types of advantages in situations where group identity and group membership are made salient. To investigate how children's group identity influences their evaluations and attribution of intentions in intergroup contexts, children were presented with three hypothetical advantages (unintentionally unfair, intentionally unfair, and fair) in a competitive context created by either an in-group member or an out-group member. Children (N = 120) were 4-6 years of age (n = 59; M_age = 5.29 years) and 7-10 years of age (n = 61; M_age = 8.34 years), including 64 girls and 56 boys. Participants were 67% European American, 18% African American, 11% Asian American, and 4% Hispanic. All participants were assigned to one of two teams in a contest in order to create an in-group/out-group manipulation prior to their evaluation of the actions. Out-group members viewed unintentional unfair and fair advantages as less acceptable than in-group members, but in-group and out-group members were equally negative in their assessment of an intentional transgression. When reasoning about unintentional and intentional unfair advantages, older children referenced the intentions of the advantage creator to justify their decisions more than younger children, whereas younger children reasoned about the impact of the behavior on their team more than older children. These novel findings shed light on developmental and social factors influencing children's understanding of fairness and intentionality in everyday contexts.

Giving priority to race or wealth in peer group contexts involving social inclusion

This study investigated children's and adolescents' predictions regarding intergroup inclusion in contexts where peers differed on two dimensions of group membership: race and wealth. African American and European American participants (N = 153; age range: 8-14 years, M_age = 11.46 years) made predictions about whether afterschool clubs would prefer to include a peer based on race or wealth and reported what they personally thought should happen. Between late childhood and early adolescence, European American participants increasingly expected that afterschool clubs would include a same-wealth peer (even when this peer was of a different race) whereas African American participants increasingly expected that the afterschool clubs would include a same-race peer (even when this peer was of a different level of wealth). Both European American and African American participants themselves thought that the clubs should include a same-wealth peer over a same-race peer, and with age, were increasingly likely to reference perceived comfort when explaining their decision. Future studies on the development of racial preferences will benefit from including wealth status information given that, with age, perceived comfort was associated with same-wealth rather than same-race status. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Lebanese adolescents' expectations about social inclusion of peers in intergroup contexts

This study examined the role of group norms, group identity, age, contact, and stereotypes on youths' decisions to include a peer in an intergroup context portraying Lebanese and American adolescents. Lebanese participants (N = 275), ages 12 and 16 years, were surveyed about expectations for inclusion of an out-group target with similar interests or an in-group target with different interests into their own Lebanese group or another American group. Findings indicated participants focused on shared interests, rather than national identity, when making inclusion decisions for either group and group norms mattered. Older participants expected American peers to be less inclusive towards an out-group peer. Direct contact predicted inclusivity of out-group American peers into one's own Lebanese group, and indirect media-based contact predicted expectations for inclusivity into an American out-group. Findings have implications for interventions aimed at improving cross-national friendships which, in turn, have the potential to reduce prejudicial attitudes.

Tolerance, Dissenting Beliefs, and Cultural Diversity

Divergent cultural, religious, and ideological beliefs and practices are often challenging to contemplate and difficult to accept when they conflict with an individual’s own convictions and way of life. The recognition that children and adolescents grow up in an increasingly diverse world has led to a general interest in fostering tolerance. In this article, we discuss three central questions on tolerance and related research. First, we consider age‐related patterns of responses toward tolerance of diversity and whether they depend on the type of dissenting beliefs and practices children are asked to tolerate. Second, we focus on how and why children are asked to be tolerant. Third, we discuss the boundaries of tolerance—the reasons and conditions that make tolerance less likely. Overall, we conclude that tolerance and intolerance can occur at all ages and depend on what, how, why, and when individuals are asked to tolerate belief discrepancy and dissenting practices.

Children's evaluations of individually and structurally based inequalities: The role of status

Social inequalities limit important opportunities and resources for members of marginalized and disadvantaged groups. Understanding the origins of how children construct their understanding of social inequalities in the context of their everyday peer interactions has the potential to yield novel insights into when-and how-individuals respond to different types of social inequalities. The present study examined whether children (N = 176; 3- to 8-years-old; 52% female, 48% male; 70% European American, 16% African American, 10% Latinx, and 4% Asian American; middle-income backgrounds) differentiate between structurally based inequalities (e.g., based on gender) and individually based inequalities (e.g., based on merit). Children were randomly assigned to a group that received more (advantaged) or fewer (disadvantaged) resources than another group due to either their groups' meritorious performance on a task or the gender biases of the peer in charge of allocating resources. Overall, children evaluated structurally based inequalities to be more unfair and worthy of rectification than individually based inequalities, and disadvantaged children were more likely to view inequalities to be wrong and act to rectify them compared to advantaged children. With age, advantaged children became more likely to rectify the inequalities and judge perpetuating allocations to be unfair. Yet, the majority of children allocated equally in response to both types of inequality. The findings generated novel evidence regarding how children evaluate and respond to individually and structurally based inequalities, and how children's own status within the inequality informs these responses. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

A Developmental Science Perspective on Social Inequality

Many people believe in equality of opportunity, but overlook and minimize the structural factors that shape social inequalities in the United States and around the world, such as systematic exclusion (e.g., educational, occupational) based on group membership (e.g., gender, race, socioeconomic status). As a result, social inequalities persist, and place marginalized social groups at elevated risk for negative emotional, learning, and health outcomes. Where do the beliefs and behaviors that underlie social inequalities originate? Recent evidence from developmental science indicates that an awareness of social inequalities begins in childhood, and that children seek to explain the underlying causes of the disparities that they observe and experience. Moreover, children and adolescents show early capacities for understanding and rectifying inequalities when regulating access to resources in peer contexts. Drawing on a social reasoning developmental framework, this paper synthesizes what is currently known about children's and adolescents' awareness, beliefs, and behavior concerning social inequalities, and highlights promising avenues by which developmental science can help reduce harmful assumptions and foster a more just society.

An experimental study of teachers' evaluations regarding peer exclusion in the classroom

BACKGROUND

While research has documented negative social and academic consequences that occur when students experience peer exclusion, few studies have been conducted to investigate teachers' evaluations of peer exclusion.

AIMS

This study investigated whether ethnic and gender biases enter teachers' evaluations of classroom peer exclusion that met criteria for bullying.

SAMPLE

Teachers (N = 740; 77% female) of early and middle adolescents participated in the study. Participants were recruited from 118 elementary and secondary schools across the Czech Republic.

METHODS

Using a between-subjects design, teachers evaluated a scenario of classroom peer exclusion initiated by majority ethnic (Czech) students. The scenarios varied contextual characteristics: target's ethnicity (majority Czech vs. minority Arab), target's gender, and excluders' gender.

RESULTS

Analyses revealed several subtle contextual effects. Although teachers viewed exclusion as having a more negative impact for the fair treatment of Arab targets than for Czech targets, their reasoning about the wrongfulness of such exclusion was less focused on the moral concerns about fairness for Arab than for Czech targets. In contrast to girl targets, teachers were less concerned about the harmful impact on exclusion for boy targets when considering intervention. Excluders' gender had significant interactions with the target's gender on reasoning about wrongfulness of exclusion and the target's ethnicity for viewing exclusion as impairing the target's academic engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of subtle ethnic and gender biases underscore the need for research on teacher perspectives on peer exclusion and for training teachers how to address peer exclusion in the classroom across various contexts.

Male Adolescents' and Young Adults' Evaluations of Interracial Exclusion in Offline and Online Settings

While there is a growing body of research on how individuals evaluate interracial exclusion in offline settings, much less is known about evaluations of interracial exclusion in online settings. This study aimed to address this gap by examining evaluations by male adolescents and young adults (N = 151; M_age = 17.59, standard deviation = 0.50) of interracial exclusion in both online and offline settings to understand these evaluations in concert. Furthermore, participants completed measures of offline and online intergroup contact, providing new evidence that intergroup contact in online settings is an important context for learning about others. The findings indicate that participants' online and offline intergroup contacts were related. In terms of evaluations of exclusion, participants were much more likely to attribute exclusion to nonrace-based reasons in online and offline settings than to race-based reasons. Additionally, participants with higher rates of intergroup contact were more likely to perceive race-based exclusion as wrong than those with low rates of contact. The novel findings document that young men's online and offline intergroup contact shape their evaluations of interracial exclusion in online settings.

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.

Lying, negligence, or lack of knowledge? Children's intention-based moral reasoning about resource claims

In a hidden inequality context, resource allocators and resource recipients are unaware that an unknowingly advantaged recipient possesses resources. The present study presented children aged 3-13 years (N = 121) with a hidden inequality vignette involving an accidental transgression in which one resource claimant, who unknowingly possessed more resources than another claimant, made an "unintentional false claim" to resources. This unintentional false claim resulted in depriving another recipient of needed resources. Results revealed that children's ability to accurately identify the claimant's intentions was related to how they evaluated and reasoned about resource claims, a previously understudied aspect of resource allocation contexts. Children's attributions of intentions to the accidental transgressor mediated the relationship between age and evaluations of the accidental transgression and the relationship between age and assignment of punishment to the accidental transgressor. With age, children who negatively evaluated the unintentional false claim shifted from reasoning about lying to a focus on negligence on the part of the unintentional false claimant. This shift reflects an increasing understanding of the accidental transgressor's benign intentions. These findings highlight how mental state knowledge and moral reasoning inform children's comprehension of resource allocation contexts. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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.

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.

The Role of Competitive and Cooperative Norms in the Development of Deviant Evaluations

The present study examined how peer group norms influence children's evaluations of deviant ingroup members. Following the manipulation of competitive or cooperative norms, participants (children, M_age  = 8.69; adolescents, M_age  = 13.81; adults, M_age  = 20.89; n = 263) evaluated deviant ingroup members from their own and the group's perspective. Children rated cooperative deviancy positively and believed their group would do the same. Adolescents and adults believed that their group would negatively evaluate cooperative deviancy when their group supported a competitive allocation strategy. Reasoning varied based on norm and participants' agreement with deviancy. Understanding an ingroup may not be favorable toward a cooperative deviant in a competitive context is a developmental challenge requiring the coordination of social and moral norms.

Theory of mind is related to children's resource allocations in gender stereotypic contexts

The present study investigated the relations between 4- to 6-year-old children's (N = 67) gender stereotypes, resource allocations, and mental state knowledge in gender-stereotypic contexts. Participants were told vignettes about female and male characters completing gender-stereotyped activities (making dolls or trucks). Children held stereotypic expectations regarding doll- and truck-making abilities, and these expectations predicted the degree of bias in their allocations of resources to the characters. Critically, children's performance on a Theory of Mind (ToM) Scale (Diverse Desires [DD], Contents False-Belief [FB], Belief-Emotion [BE]) was significantly related to their allocations of resources to individuals whose effort did not fit existing gender stereotypes (e.g., a boy who was good at making dolls). With increasing ToM competence, children allocated resources based on merit (even when the character's effort did not fit existing gender stereotypes) rather than based on stereotypes. The present results provide novel information regarding the emergence of gender stereotypes about abilities, the influence of stereotypes on children's resource allocations, and the role of ToM in children's ability to challenge gender stereotypes when allocating resources. (PsycINFO Database Record

Children rectify inequalities for disadvantaged groups

Children's decisions regarding the allocation of societal resources in the context of preexisting inequalities were investigated. African American and European American children ages 5 to 6 years (n = 91) and 10 to 11 years (n = 94) judged the acceptability of a medical resource inequality on the basis of race, allocated medical supplies, evaluated different resource allocation strategies, and completed a measure of status awareness based on race. With age, children were increasingly aware of wealth status disparities between African Americans and European Americans, and judged a medical resource inequality between groups more negatively. Further, with age, children rectified the resource inequality over perpetuating it, but only when African American children were disadvantaged. With age, children also referenced rights when reasoning about their judgments concerning the disadvantaged African American group. When European American children were disadvantaged, children did not systematically allocate more resources to one group over another. The results are discussed in terms of social inequalities, disadvantaged status, moral judgments, and intergroup attitudes. (PsycINFO Database Record

Children's recognition of fairness and others' welfare in a resource allocation task: Age related changes

The present study investigated age-related changes regarding children's (N = 136) conceptions of fairness and others' welfare in a merit-based resource allocation paradigm. To test whether children at 3- to 5-years-old and 6- to 8-years-old took others' welfare into account when dividing resources, in addition to merit and equality concerns, children were asked to allocate, judge, and reason about allocations of necessary (needed to avoid harm) and luxury (enjoyable to have) resources to a hardworking and a lazy character. While 3- to 5-year-olds did not differentiate between distributing luxury and necessary resources, 6- to 8-year-olds allocated luxury resources more meritoriously than necessary resources. Further, children based their allocations of necessary resources on concerns for others' welfare, rather than merit, even when one character was described as working harder. The findings revealed that, with age, children incorporated the concerns for others' welfare and merit into their conceptions of fairness in a resource allocation context, and prioritized these concerns differently depending on whether they were allocating luxury or necessary resources. Further, with age, children weighed multiple moral concerns including equality, merit, and others' welfare, when determining the fair allocation of resources. (PsycINFO Database Record

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.

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.