When is peer rejection justifiable?: Children's understanding across two cultures

Social Anxiety and Bullying Victimization in Children and Early Adolescents: The Role of Developmental Period and Immigrant Status

Research reveals that social anxiety may be predictive of bullying victimization, but it is not clear whether this relation stands for different groups of youth. The present study examines this association by employing a longitudinal design over 1 year and including the moderating role of developmental period (childhood vs. early adolescence) and students' immigrant status (native vs. non-native). T1 sample included 506 children (46.44% girls, mean age M = 8.55 years, SD = 0.55) and 310 early adolescents (50% girls, mean age = 12.54 years, SD = 0.59) recruited in schools in Northern Italy. Due to missing cases and drop-outs from T1 to T2, the final sample comprised 443 and 203 students from primary and middle school, respectively. Social anxiety and peer victimization were assessed through self-reported questionnaires. Results indicated that victimization at T2 was predicted by a 3-way interaction between T1 social anxiety, immigrant status, and developmental period. In particular, socially anxious early adolescents with an immigrant background were the most victimized. The results are discussed in terms of group dynamics and intergroup processes. The findings highlight the importance of personal variables in the cumulation of risks: social anxiety is more predictive of bullying victimization for immigrant early adolescents than for children or native early adolescents.

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.

Teachers’ ratings of social exclusion among students: The role of situational information and the ethnic origin of the excluded student based on the example of Syrian refugees

In the current study, we examined teachers’ ratings of social exclusion among students. 120 teachers (M age=24.00, SD=3.71, 88% female) evaluated a hypothetical exclusion scenario in which the excluded student’s origin (German vs. Syrian refugee) was varied as well as whether participants received additional situational information about prior norm-violating behavior of the excluded student or not. Additionally, participants rated how likely they would intervene in the situation. For the evaluation of exclusion and the likelihood of intervention, there was a main effect of additional situational information, revealing that participants evaluated exclusion as less acceptable and were more likely to intervene if there was no additional situational information. Regarding the evaluation of exclusion, there was an interaction of additional situational information and the origin of the excluded student as the effect of additional situational information was bigger if the excluded student was German. For the likelihood of intervention, this interaction was not significant; but descriptively a similar pattern emerged. Results indicate that information about prior norm-violating behavior is more relevant for teachers’ reactions to social exclusion than the origin of the excluded student. However, in situations with an understandable reason for exclusion, teachers do include the origin of the excluded student in their considerations.

Perceiving faces through reconnection-colored glasses after social exclusion: Evidence from N100

Social exclusion motivates individuals to selectively reconnect with others, in which face categorization plays an important role. However, it remains unknown how reconnection possibility interacts with perception at the very early stage of face categorization. To address this issue, after social exclusion or social inclusion priming, participants were instructed to select one person from two gender-matched strangers as a future "coworker" (with high reconnection possibility; the left one is a future "stranger," with low reconnection possibility) for another ostensible task, and then complete an orientation judgment task of self-face, coworker face and stranger face, with event-related brain potential (ERP) recordings. Results showed that excluded participants produced larger N100 to future coworker face than to stranger face, but no such difference was found among included participants. Compared with included participants, excluded participants produced significantly larger N100 to future coworker face. Moreover, N100 elicited by future coworker face was significantly negatively correlated with rating scores of exclusion only for social excluded participants. These findings indicate that social reconnection desire may contribute to the biased face perception which facilitates face categorization of socially excluded people.

Moral Reasoning about Aggressive Behavior in Relation to Type of Aggression, Age and Gender in South Korean Pupils

Studies of moral reasoning in relation to aggressive behaviors have paid limited attention to different types of aggression, and have mainly been conducted in Western societies. We describe findings from a study of 157 children, aged 6 or 11 years, from two schools in South Korea. Using a cartoon scenario methodology, we assessed moral reasoning about eight types of aggression: verbal, physical individual, physical group, social exclusion, rumor spreading, breaking one’s belongings, sending a nasty text via mobile phone, and sending a nasty message/email via computer. Four aspects of moral reasoning were assessed: moral judgment, harmfulness, reason for judgment, and causal responsibility. Many significant differences by type of aggression were found, especially for social exclusion (seen as less wrong and harmful, and more the victim’s responsibility), physical group aggression (seen as more wrong or harmful, and a matter of fairness, especially in older children and boys), and cyber aggression (seen more as the aggressor’s responsibility). Older children gave more reasons based on welfare, and fewer “don’t know” responses for reasons and attributions. Gender differences were relatively few, but girls did make more use of welfare in the moral reasoning domain. Findings are discussed in relation to previous research and the cultural context in South Korea.

College Students' Evaluations and Reasoning About Exclusion of Students with Autism and Learning Disability: Context and Goals may Matter More than Contact

This study used mixed-effects logistic regression to examine undergraduates' (N = 142) evaluations and reasoning about scenarios involving disability-based exclusion. Scenarios varied by disability [autism spectrum disorder (ASD) versus learning disability (LD)], the context of exclusion (classroom versus social), and whether or not a grade was at stake. Participants were more likely to determine exclusion was acceptable if the excluded student had an ASD diagnosis, there was a grade at stake, and it occurred in a classroom. Exclusion was less likely to be considered acceptable in the "no grade" compared to the "grade" conditions for LD students, but remained high in both conditions for autistic students. This study also describes contextual variations in participants' justifications for their evaluations.

Culture, Social Interdependence, and Ostracism

Recent research has demonstrated that cultural groups differ in how they experience ostracism and in how they behave in the wake of being ostracized. We review this literature paying particular attention to the role that one key cultural variable, social interdependence, plays in moderating responses to ostracism. Although the data present a complex picture, a growing number of studies have suggested that collectivistic cultures and high levels of social interdependence are associated with less negative responses to ostracism. We review explanations for observed cultural and individual-level differences in responses to ostracism and make a series of suggestions for future research that, we hope, will disambiguate current findings and offer a more nuanced picture of ostracism and the significance of cultural variation inherent within it.

Children's and Adolescents' Expectations about Challenging Unfair Group Norms

Youth often hold group norms that perpetuate inequality. One way these norms can be changed is by challenging these norms by choosing to include new members into these groups who hold morally just norms. In the current study, children's and adolescents' inclusion decisions and social reasoning about challenging group norms through inclusion were investigated. The sample included 9-10 (children) and 13-14 year-olds (adolescents) (N = 673, 54.4% female). Participants supported including challengers into groups holding norms supporting relational aggression and unequal allocation of resources, but they were less likely to support including a challenger into a physically aggressive group. Age-related differences and gender differences were found: children and female participants were more likely to include challengers than were adolescents and male participants. The findings indicate that youth support including new members who would challenge morally questionable group norms, but that their support depends on the specific norm the group holds.

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.

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

Social exclusion and inclusion from groups, as well as the distribution of resources, are fundamental aspects of social life, and serve as sources of conflicts that bear on issues of fairness and equality, beginning in childhood. For the most part, research on social exclusion and allocation of resources has not focused on the issue of group membership. Yet, social exclusion from groups and the denial of resources reflect societal issues pertaining to social inequality and its counterpoint, fair treatment of others. Social inequality occurs when opportunities and resources are distributed unevenly in society, often through group norms about allocation that reflect socially defined categories of persons. This occurs at multiple levels of societal organization, from experiences of exclusion in childhood such as being left out of a play activity, to being denied access to resources as a member of a group. These situations extend to larger level experiences in the adult world concerning social exclusion from voting, for example, or participation in educational institutions. Thus, most decisions regarding social exclusion and the denial of resources involve considerations of group identity and group membership, implicitly or explicitly, which contribute to prejudice and bias, even though this has rarely been investigated in developmental science. Current research illustrating the role of group identity and autonomy regarding decision-making about social exclusion and the denial of resources is reviewed from the Social Reasoning Developmental model, one that integrates social domain theory and developmental social identity theories to investigate how children use moral, conventional, and psychological judgments to evaluate contexts reflecting group identity, group norms, and intergroup dynamics.

Children's inequity aversion depends on culture: a cross-cultural comparison

Recent work showed the presence of strong forms of inequity aversion in young children. When presented with an uneven number of items, children would rather tend to throw one item away than to distribute them unequally between two anonymous others. The current study examined whether or not this pattern is a universal part of typical development by investigating 6- and 7-year-old Ugandan children. Results revealed that the Ugandan children, in contrast to their U.S. peers, tended to distribute the resources unequally rather than to throw the remaining resource away. This points to cross-cultural differences in the development of children's fairness-related decision making.

Adolescents’ Explanations for the Exclusion of Peers With Mental Health Problems

Young people with mental health problems are often excluded from their peer group; however, research has not specifically explored their peers’ explanations for this exclusion. Drawing on data from group interviews with Irish adolescents ( N = 148), this study explores the reasons offered for rejecting young people with mental health problems. Such reasons include perceived violation of expectations of friendships, and perceived social and personal risks to members of the peer group. The implications of these findings for the development of interventions to combat the stigma of mental health problems are discussed.

Explicit and implicit stigma towards peers with mental health problems in childhood and adolescence

BACKGROUND

 Children and adolescents with mental health problems are widely reported to have problems with peer relationships; however, few studies have explored the way in which these children are regarded by their peers. For example, little is known about the nature of peer stigmatisation, and no published research has investigated implicit attitudes thus ensuring that stigma is not well understood. To address this issue, the current study explored patterns of explicit and implicit stigmatisation of peers with depression and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

METHODS

The sample was 385 children (M = 10.21 years) and adolescents (M = 15.36 years). Participants completed a questionnaire assessing explicit stigma towards an age- and gender-matched peer with ADHD or depression and another peer with 'normal issues' who were described in vignettes. They also completed a modified version of the implicit association test (IAT) that explored implicit attitudes towards the target peers.

RESULTS

Questionnaire data indicated that the peer with ADHD was perceived more negatively than the peer with depression on all dimensions of stigma, except perceived dangerousness and fear. In contrast, the IAT findings suggest that some participants had more negative views of the peer with depression than the peer with ADHD. Specifically, the findings demonstrate that adolescent males demonstrated significantly stronger negative implicit evaluations of depression compared with younger males and adolescent females.

CONCLUSIONS

Children and adolescents demonstrate stigmatising responses to peers with common mental health problems. The nature and extent of these responses depends on the type of problem and the type of measurement used. The findings highlight the importance of using both explicit and implicit measures of stigma.