Search for: All records

BackgroundWhile 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. AimsThis study investigated whether ethnic and gender biases enter teachers’ evaluations of classroom peer exclusion that met criteria for bullying. SampleTeachers (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. MethodsUsing 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. ResultsAnalyses 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. ConclusionsThe 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. 

Abstract Early and middle adolescents' judgements 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 the light of intergroup research on those who challenge injustices. 

Abstract 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. 

Abstract 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 when peer and parent sources of influence were present and provided justifications for their expectations. Results revealed that, while participants predicted 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 efforts to improve the quality of interracial peer interactions and programs designed to promote positive intergroup peer relationships. 

Abstract 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. 

Previous research has shown that morally-relevant theory of mind enables children to avoid blaming a peer for an accidental transgression. The current study investigated whether this form of theory of mind helps children recognize that gender inequalities are unfair and create negative emotional experiences. Further, the study examined this ability across three perspectives (for themselves, for those who have been advantaged by inequality, and for those who have been disadvantaged by inequality). Participants were 141 children (MAge = 6.67 years, 49% female, 32% ethnic/racial minority) recruited from the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S. Experience with the negative consequences of gender bias and more advanced mental state understanding was associated with more negative evaluations of gender inequalities and more neutral attributions of others’ emotions. These findings shed light on the role of different forms of mental state understanding in children’s evaluations of inequalities based on gender. 

Reducing prejudice in childhood requires changing group norms that often perpetuate prejudicial attitudes and in-group bias. Research has shown that intergroup contact is one of the most effective means to reduce prejudice. Yet little research has examined whether intergroup contact in the form of class discussions that challenge negative group norms might promote the desire to play with diverse peers. This study tested whether a classroom intervention program, Developing Inclusive Youth, which included experiences of direct and indirect contact, would increase children’s desire for contact with diverse peers and reduce reported experiences of social exclusion. A multisite randomized control trial was implemented with 983 students (502 females; 58.5% White; Mage = 9.64 years) and 48 teachers in 48 third, fourth, and fifth grade classrooms across six schools. Overall, students in the program displayed more positive expectations about play with diverse peers and fewer experiences with social exclusion. Classroom discussions involved challenging group norms that perpetuate same-group preferences. Children’s grade moderated their desire for contact with peers from some but not all social groups. This type of program may be an effective means for increasing positive, inclusive group norms in childhood, as this is a time in development when attitudes and preferences for peer friendships are forming. Increasing positive intergroup norms in the classroom creates academic learning environments that promote healthy child development 

Little is known about how children and adolescents evaluate unequal teacher allocations of leadership duties based on ethnicity-race and gender in the classroom. U.S. boys and girls, White (40.7%), Multiracial (18.5%), Black/African American (16.0%), Latine (14.2%), Asian (5.5%), Pacific Islander (0.4%), and other (4.7%) ethnic-racial backgrounds, 8 - 14 years, N = 275, evaluated teacher allocations of high-status leadership positions favoring specific ethnic-racial or gender groups during 2018 - 2021. Adolescents, more than children, negatively evaluated unequal teacher allocations of leadership duties that resulted in group-based inequalities, expected peers who shared the identity of a group disadvantaged by the teacher’s allocation to view it more negatively than others, and rectified inequalities. Understanding perceptions of teacher-based bias provides an opportunity for interventions designed to create fair and just classrooms that motivate all students to achieve. 

Children, like adults, care about the fair and equal treatment of others. At the same time, they often reject those they perceive to be different. How does this contradiction arise? And how can we help children recognize that excluding someone perceived to be different may rest on assumptions that are potentially harmful to others? This article reviews the science of prejudice and describes a new program designed to reduce prejudice and bias in childhood.