Learning to control ethnic intergroup bias in childhood

FitzRoy, Sarah; Rutland, Adam

doi:10.1002/ejsp.746

Cited by 53 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, we build on existing research that shows the relevance of intergroup processes for children and adolescents' social interactions (see Fitzroy & Rutland, 2010;Killen & Rutland, 2011;Nesdale, 2008;Sierksma et al, 2014), and extend it further by applying this approach to bystander intentions during incidents of intergroup verbal aggression.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of bystander intentions and social–moral reasoning about intergroup verbal aggression

Palmer

Rutland

Cameron

2015

British J of Dev Psycho

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A developmental intergroup approach was taken to examine the development of prosocial bystander intentions among children and adolescents. Participants as bystanders (N =260) aged 8-10 and 13-15 years were presented with scenarios of direct aggression between individuals from different social groups (i.e., intergroup verbal aggression). These situations involved either an ingroup aggressor and an outgroup victim or an outgroup aggressor and an ingroup victim. The present study focussed on the role of intergroup factors (group membership, ingroup identification, group norms and social-moral reasoning) in the development of prosocial bystander intentions. Findings showed that prosocial bystander intentions declined with age. This effect was partially mediated by the ingroup norm to intervene and perceived severity of the verbal aggression. However, a moderated mediation analysis showed that, only when the victim was an ingroup member and the aggressor an outgroup member, did participants become more likely with age to report prosocial bystander intentions due to increased ingroup identification. Results also showed that younger children focussed on moral concerns and adolescents focussed more on psychological concerns when reasoning about their bystander intention. These novel findings help explain the developmental decline in prosocial bystander intentions from middle childhood into adolescence when observing direct intergroup aggression.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of bystander intentions and social–moral reasoning about intergroup verbal aggression

Palmer

Rutland

Cameron

2015

British J of Dev Psycho

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, crossethnic friendships may also foster positive development through decreasing perceived discrimination and intergroup anxiety and increasing social competence. Similarly, future research may incorporate the role of perspective-taking and theory of mind in the association between cross-ethnic friendships and well-being, since such social-cognitive abilities may moderate negative outgroup attitudes (e.g., Fitzroy & Rutland, 2010) and therefore promote well-being.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, a mutual sharing of information among different ethnic group members is likely to promote social-cognitive skills such as perspective-taking and empathy and thereby facilitate children's social interactions in multi-ethnic settings (Turner et al, 2007). In fact, cross-ethnic friendships improve perspective taking (Eisenberg et al, 2009), resilience (Bagci, Rutland, Kumsahiro, Smith, & Blumberg, 2014), and social skills (Lease & Blake, 2005) and therefore equip children with necessary skills to moderate prejudicial attitudes (Fitzroy & Rutland, 2010). Second, this kind of information exchange across ethnic boundaries also provides children with a varied range of reference points to evaluate themselves (Antonio, 2004), and functions like 'social capital', providing children with opportunities to access important information about being successful in an ethnically diverse society (Crosnoe, Cavanagh, & Elder, 2003).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-ethnic friendships, psychological well-being, and academic outcomes: Study of South Asian and White children in the UK

Bağcı

Kumashiro

Rutland

et al. 2016

European Journal of Developmental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Because these studies did not measure children's awareness of or desire to comply with social norms, it is not possible to say that young children never demonstrate susceptibility to social desirability. In fact, children as young as six may be aware of social desirability norms and respond in socially desirable ways under some circumstances ( e.g ., when accountable to teachers and classmates; FitzRoy & Rutland, 2010; Rutland, Cameron, Milne, & McGeorge, 2005). Additionally, even preschool-aged children conceal opinions that may be perceived as socially undesirable, such as negative evaluations of someone's drawing or a gift that one has received (Fu & Lee, 2007; Talwar, Murphy, & Lee, 2007).…”

Section: How Does the Dissociated State Of Attitudes Develop?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of implicit and explicit attitudes in children and adults: Tests in the domain of religion.

Heiphetz

Spelke

Banaji

2013

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among the most replicated results in social cognition is the split between explicit and implicit attitudes; adults demonstrate weaker group-based preferences on explicit rather than implicit measures. However, the developmental origins of this pattern remain unclear. If implicit attitudes develop over a protracted period of time, children should not demonstrate the implicit preferences observed among adults. Additionally, unlike adults, children may report group-based preferences due to their lesser concern with social desirability. In Study 1, Christian adults showed the expected pattern of robust implicit preference but no explicit preference. In four additional experiments, 6–8 year old children whose parents identified them as Christian viewed characters described as belonging to two starkly different religious groups (“strong religious difference”) or two relatively similar religious groups (“weak religious difference”). Participants then completed explicit and implicit (IAT) measures of attitude toward Christians and either Hindus (Study 2) or Jews (Studies 3–5). Three main results emerged. First, like adults, children showed significant implicit pro-Christian preferences across all studies. Second, unlike adults, children in the “strong religious difference” case reported preferences of approximately the same magnitude as their implicit attitudes (i.e., no dissociation). Third, even in the “weak religious difference” case, children showed implicit pro-Christian preferences (although, like adults, their explicit attitudes were not sensitive to intergroup difference). These data suggest that the seeds of implicit religious preferences are sown early and that children's explicit preferences are influenced by the social distance between groups.

show abstract

Learning to control ethnic intergroup bias in childhood

Abstract: Abstract

Cited by 53 publications

References 65 publications

The development of bystander intentions and social–moral reasoning about intergroup verbal aggression

The development of bystander intentions and social–moral reasoning about intergroup verbal aggression

Cross-ethnic friendships, psychological well-being, and academic outcomes: Study of South Asian and White children in the UK

Patterns of implicit and explicit attitudes in children and adults: Tests in the domain of religion.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About