Fairness or stereotypes? Young children's priorities when evaluating group exclusion and inclusion

Toy stories: Children's use of gender stereotypes in making social judgments

Young children tend to categorize people and objects to understand their environments, but under certain circumstances, they can also appreciate individual differences. Three studies investigated how young children use categorical and individuating information to make social judgments. In Study 1, 3- to 5-year-old children (N = 33; 18 boys, 15 girls) predicted hypothetical peers' preferences for toys along a spectrum from highly stereotyped for girls to neutral to highly stereotyped for boys. Hypothetical peers were described by gender and as enjoying activities that were stereotypical, counter-stereotypical, or unrelated to gender. Children's choices were consistent with use of the provided individuating information rather than gender alone. In Studies 2 and 3, we retested these ideas with preschool samples from the United States (N = 44) and China (N = 21) respectively and also asked children about their toy, playmate, and activity preferences. For both samples, responses followed the same pattern as Study 1 for social judgments and were characterized by preferences for same-gender peers and neutral or gender-typed toys and activities, particularly in girls. While young children express preferences consistent with gender identity, they process and use individuating information in making social judgments, a capacity that could be targeted by interventions designed to reduce the development of gender-based bias.

Disagreement, justification, and equitable moral judgments: A brief training study

Although theorists agree that social interactions play a major role in moral development, previous research has not experimentally assessed how specific features of social interactions affect children's moral judgments and reasoning. The current study assessed two features: disagreement and justification. In a brief training phase, children aged 4-5.5 years (N = 129) discussed simple moral scenarios about issues of fairness (how to allocate things between individuals) with a puppet who, in a between-participants factorial design, either agreed or disagreed with the children's ideas and either asked or did not ask the children to justify their ideas. Children then responded to another set of moral scenarios in a test phase that was the same for all children. Children in the "agree and do not justify" baseline condition showed an inflexible equality bias (preferring only equal allocations regardless of context), but children who had experiences of disagreement or experiences of being asked to justify themselves shifted toward making equitable decisions based on common ground norms and values. Furthermore, false belief competence was related to children's decisions and justifications. These findings support the classic Piagetian hypothesis that social interactions are a catalyst of cognitive disequilibrium and moral development.

Understanding Intergroup Relations in Childhood and Adolescence

There are various theoretical approaches for understanding intergroup biases among children and adolescents. This article focuses on the social identity approach and argues that existing research will benefit by more fully considering the implications of this approach for examining intergroup relations among youngsters. These implications include (a) the importance of self-categorization, (b) the role of self-stereotyping and group identification, (c) the relevance of shared understandings and developing ingroup consensus, and (d) the importance of coordinated action for positive and negative intergroup relations. These implications of the social identity approach suggest several avenues for investigating children’s and adolescents’ intergroup relations that have not been fully appreciated in the existing literature. However, there are also limitations to the social identity approach for the developmental understanding and some of these are discussed.

Group Identity and Ingroup Bias: The Social Identity Approach

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

Adolescents’ and emerging adults’ judgments and justifications for social inclusion or exclusion of language-outgroup members: Language is just part of the story

Language becomes an important intergroup category for children from early on in their lives; however, few studies have examined the role language plays in social inclusion and exclusion. This study examines how adolescents and emerging adults in China make inclusion judgments of language-outgroup members and what reasons they use to justify their inclusion judgments. High school and university students ( N = 376, 63.3% female) were recruited to complete a survey designed to examine their inclusion judgments and justifications. Our findings indicate that participants made different inclusion judgments toward speakers of different languages, and language was the most frequently used justification. They also used group identity, personal choice, and autonomy, group functioning, nationality, moral, and political/historical reasons as justifications. Adolescents were found to be more exclusive than emerging adults and used group identity and political/historical reasons more often to justify their inclusion judgments. The findings add to our understanding of the sophisticated ways in which adolescents and emerging adults make social decisions.

Social evaluation and imitation of prosocial and antisocial agents in infants, children, and adults

The question of whether infants prefer prosocial agents over antisocial agents is contentious. Therefore, the first goal of the present study was to replicate previous findings regarding infants' preference. The second goal was to assess whether infants are more likely to imitate a prosocial agent than an antisocial agent. We tested 9-month-old, 14-month-old, and 4-year-old children. The study used the "opening a box to get a toy" paradigm in which an animal puppet is trying unsuccessfully to open a box and is either helped by a prosocial puppet or hindered by an antisocial puppet. We presented these social events via video, and subsequently administered an imitation task. As an additional control, adults were asked to describe the videos showing the prosocial and antisocial agent. Although most adults were able to identify both agents, the three age groups of children did not prefer the prosocial agent over the antisocial agent, and were not more likely to imitate the prosocial agent. The lack of differences might be explained by methodological issues or by a lack of robustness of the effect.

Does group membership affect children's judgments of social transgressions?

Children judge in-group members more favorably than out-group members. They also judge moral transgressions as more serious and more worthy of punishment than conventional transgressions. Here we asked whether children's judgments of moral and conventional transgressions vary by the group membership of the transgressor (in-group, neutral, out-group, or self). In addition, we asked whether judgments of the transgressions would extend to the transgressors themselves, including cases in which the self was the transgressor. Results show that transgressions committed by out-group members were judged as being more serious and more punish-worthy than those committed by members of other groups. In addition, children judged out-group transgressors more harshly, and the self more leniently, than other group members. Overall, results suggest that group membership does affect judgments of transgressions and transgressors, with out-group members consistently judged the most negatively and the self consistently judged the least negatively. However, when judging the transgressor or the seriousness of the transgression, domain distinctions do persist even as group membership varies. Although, when assigning punishment, domain distinctions persist only when judging the transgressions of out-group members and neutral individuals. These findings demonstrate the powerful effect of group membership on the judgments of both acts and actors, indicating that when judging transgressions children consider not only the moral or conventional status of the act but also the group membership of the actor.

Children's moral judgments about psychological harm: Links among harm salience, victims' vulnerability, and child sympathy

This study examined 106 5- and 6-year-olds' (M = 5.84 years, SD = 0.62) judgments and justifications about psychological harm (e.g., acts such as teasing or excluding others) assessed in three experimental harm salience conditions (highly salient harm, less salient harm, and no harm) crossed with two victims' vulnerability conditions (typical child and vulnerable child). We also examined interactions between these features and parent and child ratings of sympathy. Children evaluated highly salient harm as more unacceptable, more punishable, and more wrong independent of authority and as resulting in victims' more negative emotions than less salient harm and, in turn, no harm. Children reasoned about others' welfare most for highly salient harm stories, whereas children reasoned about less salient harm stories as involving moral and non-moral concerns. In considering victims' vulnerability, children evaluated harm done to typical victims as more wrong than harm done to vulnerable victims. Higher levels of child-reported sympathy were associated with ratings of transgressions as more unacceptable and wrong independent of authority, but only for less salient harm stories. The results demonstrate children's ability to incorporate different features of psychological harm into their moral judgments and highlight the importance of child sympathy in their understanding of more nuanced forms of harm.

Development of anti-immigrant attitudes in adolescence: The role of parents, peers, intergroup friendships, and empathy

Ethnic and racial intergroup attitudes are assumed to develop due to the influence of socialization contexts. However, there is still little longitudinal evidence supporting this claim. We also know little about the relative importance of socialization contexts, the possible interplay between them as well as about the conditions and mechanisms that might underlie socialization effects. This longitudinal study of adolescents (N = 517) examined the effects of parents and peers’ anti‐immigrant attitudes as well as intergroup friendships on relative changes in adolescents’ anti‐immigrant prejudice, controlling for the effects of socioeconomic background. It also examined whether the effects of parents or peers would depend on adolescents’ intergroup friendships. In addition, it explored whether the effects of parents, peers, and intergroup friendships would be mediated or moderated by adolescents’ empathy. Results showed significant effects of parents, peers, intergroup friendships, and socioeconomic background on changes in youth attitudes, highlighting the role of parental prejudice. They also showed adolescents with immigrant friends to be less affected by parents and peers’ prejudice than youth without immigrant friends. In addition, results showed the effects of parents, peers, and intergroup friendships to be mediated by adolescents’ empathic concern. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

What fosters concern for inequality among American adolescents?

Understanding cultural beliefs about social and economic inequality is vital to discerning the roadblocks and pathways to addressing that inequality. The foundation of concern for inequality is laid during adolescence, yet scholars understand little about the factors that influence whether and how adolescents come to express such concern. Arguing that structural and cultural contexts are just as consequential as whether adolescents themselves are members of disadvantaged groups, I draw on four theoretical perspectives to identify factors that influence adolescents' concern for addressing inequality: the underdog thesis, intergroup contact theory, the education enlightens thesis, and ideological buttressing. Using representative restricted-use Educational Longitudinal Survey data, I find that 12th-graders' beliefs are indeed influenced by more than their own demography: the diversity of their social milieu, the content of education in and out of the classroom, and ideological buttressing via political region and entertainment all influence whether they express concern for addressing inequality. These findings suggest extensions and amendments to the four theoretical perspectives and underscore the importance of studying structural and cultural factors that shape beliefs about inequality. The results also point to several interventions that may increase students' concern for inequality: involvement in civic-oriented extracurricular activities, more education in academic subjects that consider inequality, nurturing of cross-race friendships, and increased leisure reading.

What Makes Children Defy Majorities? The Role of Dissenters in Chinese and Spanish Preschoolers' Social Judgments

When many people say the same thing, the individual is more likely to endorse this information than when just a single person says the same. Yet, the influence of consensus information may be modulated by many personal, contextual and cultural variables. Here, we study the sensitivity of Chinese (N = 68) and Spanish (N = 82) preschoolers to consensus in social decision making contexts. Children faced two different types of peer-interaction events, which involved (1) uncertain or ambiguous scenarios open to interpretation (social interpretation context), and (2) explicit scenarios depicting the exclusion of a peer (moral judgment context). Children first observed a video in which a group of teachers offered their opinion about the events, and then they were asked to evaluate the information provided. Participants were assigned to two conditions that differed in the type of consensus: Unanimous majority (non-dissenter condition) and non-unanimous majority (dissenter condition). In the dissenter condition, we presented the conflicting opinions of three teachers vs. one teacher. In the non-dissenter condition, we presented the unanimous opinion of three teachers. The general results indicated that children’s sensitivity to consensus varies depending both on the degree of ambiguity of the social events and the presence or not of a dissenter: (1) Children were much more likely to endorse the majority view when they were uncertain (social interpretation context), than when they already had a clear interpretation of the situation (moral judgment context); (2) The presence of a dissenter resulted in a significant decrease in children’s confidence in majority. Interestingly, in the moral judgment context, Chinese and Spanish children differed in their willingness to defy a majority whose opinion run against their own. While Spanish children maintained their own criteria regardless of the type of condition, Chinese children did so when an “allied” dissenter was present (dissenter condition) but not when confronting a unanimous majority (non-dissenter condition). Tentatively, we suggest that this difference might be related to culture-specific patterns regarding children’s deference toward adults.

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.

Young Children in Intractable Conflicts

The article examines the political socialization of young Jewish-Israeli children who live under the Israeli–Palestinian intractable conflict. It proposes arguments and presents empirical evidence to suggest that the way in which political socialization of young children happens in this context contributes to the development of conflict-supporting narratives of ethos of conflict and collective memory by the youngest generation. As a result, the conflict solidifies adherence to these narratives in adulthood, thereby serving as a major obstacle to the processes of peace-making and peace-building. Specifically, as evidence for showing how the political socialization works in Israel, a series of studies conducted in Israeli kindergartens and elementary schools are presented. These studies recount the contents acquired by young children, as well as contents delivered by teachers, related to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. This indicates the serious consequences of acquiring conflict-supporting narratives at an early age in societies involved in intractable conflict.

The educational impact of Rechov Sumsum/Shara’a Simsim: A Sesame Street television series to promote respect and understanding among children living in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza

A pre-and post-test study assessed the effects of Israeli and Palestinian children’s viewing of Rechov Sumsum/Shara’a Simsim, a television series presenting messages of mutual respect and understanding. Israeli-Jewish, Palestinian-Israeli, and Palestinian preschoolers ( N = 275) were interviewed about their social judgments. Results showed that although some of the children had negative conceptions about adult Arabs and Jews, children, on the whole, did not invoke these stereotypes when evaluating peer conflict situations between Israeli and Palestinian children. Exposure to the programme was linked to an increase in children’s use of both prosocial justifications to resolve conflicts and positive attributes to describe members of the other group. Palestinian children’s abilities to identify symbols of their own culture increased over time. The results indicate the effectiveness of media-based interventions such as Rechov Sumsum/Shara’a Simsim on countering negative stereotypes by building a peer-oriented context that introduces children to the everyday lives of people from different cultures.

Korean, Japanese, and US students’ judgments about peer exclusion: Evidence for diversity

Children and adolescents (4th-, 7th-, and 10th-graders) from Korea ( N 1/4 553) were surveyed regarding their evaluations of peer group exclusion of atypical peers: aggressive behaviour, unconventional appearance, acting like a clown, cross-gender behaviour, slow runner, and sad personality. The data were compared to a previously collected data set from Japan ( N = 513), and the US ( N 1/4 542) using the identical assessment. It was hypothesised that differences between Korean and Japanese cultures would be found, which would support our proposal that Asian cultures should not be automatically grouped as one monolithic “collectivistic” culture. Further, it was expected that students’ judgments of exclusion, conformity, and self-perceived differences would vary by the context of exclusion in all three cultures as well as by age and gender of the participants. The results for the exclusion judgments confirmed our hypotheses regarding within-Asian cultural differences, and the findings for judgments about conformity and self-perceived differences provide a mixed picture of confirmation for our expectations. In general, the results support our theory of developmental social cognition in which multiple sources of influence have a significant effect on social decision-making involving the exclusion of others.

Effects of peer group rejection, group membership, and group norms, on children's outgroup prejudice

This study examined the effects on 6- and 8-year old children ( n = 160) of rejection versus acceptance by an initial group, the reason for the rejection or acceptance (personal versus category-based), and the norms (inclusion versus exclusion) of a new group to which the children were assigned, on their negative affect and attitudes towards the initial group, new group and an outgroup. Results showed that rejected compared with accepted children had a negative attitude towards the initial group, but that both were equally positive towards their new group. In addition, whereas accepted participants were less positive towards the outgroup, rejected participants displayed outgroup prejudice. Results also revealed main effects on group attitudes of participants' age and group norms, as well as a peer status × status reason interaction, but participants' negative affect was only affected by their age. The basis of the effect of peer group rejection on outgroup prejudice is discussed.

Political socialization of young children in intractable conflicts

This article examines the political socialization of young children who live under conditions of intractable conflict. We present four premises: First, we argue that, within the context of intractable conflict, political socialization begins earlier and faster than previously suspected, and is evident among young children. Second, we propose that the agents of political socialization impart narratives of the ethos of conflict and of collective memory in young children that support continuation of the conflict. Third, we maintain that the great majority of the young children form systematic and coherent systems of beliefs, attitudes, and emotions that support the conflict as a result of political socialization and direct exposure to conflict. Finally, we suggest that the conflict-related contents absorbed by children have lasting effects on the solidification of children’s later socio-psychological repertoire. Our arguments highlight the serious consequences of political socialization processes on very young children in societies involved in intractable conflict.

Struggles for Equal Rights and Social Justice as Unrepresented and Represented in Psychological Research

Issues of equality and social justice remain important concerns for contemporary societies. Struggles for equal rights and fair treatment continue in both organized movements and in acts of everyday life. We first consider trends in psychological research that fail to address such struggles and may even impede theoretical understanding of the complex processes of thought and action involved when individuals confront situations of welfare, justice, and rights. Then, we consider research, which attempts to address these issues. We review studies on the development of moral judgments and on understandings of equality and distributive justice. We also discuss research that accounts for the varying social contexts of individual lives and conceives of human behavior as engaged in moral judgments, which often produce resistance and opposition to injustice. In conclusion, we call for more attention in psychological research to issues of equity and social justice.

Adolescent judgments and reasoning about the failure to include peers with social disabilities

Adolescents with autism spectrum disorder often do not have access to crucial peer social activities. This study examines how typically developing adolescents evaluate decisions not to include a peer based on disability status, and the justifications they apply to these decisions. A clinical interview methodology was used to elicit judgments and justifications across four contexts. We found adolescents are more likely to judge the failure to include as acceptable in personal as compared to public contexts. Using logistic regression, we found that adolescents are more likely to provide moral justifications as to why failure to include is acceptable in a classroom as compared to home, lab group, and soccer practice contexts. Implications for intervention are also discussed.

Challenging gender stereotypes: Theory of mind and peer group dynamics

To investigate the social cognitive skills related to challenging gender stereotypes, children (N = 61, 3-6 years) evaluated a peer who challenged gender stereotypic norms held by the peer's group. Participants with false belief theory of mind (FB ToM) competence were more likely than participants who did not have FB ToM to expect a peer to challenge the group's stereotypes and propose that the group engage in a non-stereotypic activity. Further, participants with FB ToM rated challenging the peer group more positively. Participants without FB ToM did not differentiate between their own and the group's evaluation of challenges to the group's stereotypic norms, but those with ToM competence asserted that they would be more supportive of challenging the group norm than would the peer group. Results reveal the importance of social-cognitive competencies for recognizing the legitimacy of challenging stereotypes, and for understanding one's own and other group perspectives.

Challenging gender stereotypes: resistance and exclusion

The likelihood of resisting gender-stereotypic peer group norms, along with expectations about personal resistance, was investigated in 9- to 10-year-olds and 13- to 14-year-olds (N = 292). Participants were told about a stereotype conforming group (boys playing football; girls doing ballet) and a stereotype nonconforming group (boys doing ballet; girls playing football). Contrary to expectations from gender-stereotyping research, participants stated that they would personally resist gender-stereotypic norms, and more so than they would expect their peers to resist. However, expecting peers to resist declined with age. Participants expected that exclusion from the group was a consequence for challenging the peer group, and understood the asymmetrical status of gender stereotypes with an expectation that it would be more difficult for boys to challenge stereotypes than for girls.

Development of in-group favoritism in children's third-party punishment of selfishness

When enforcing norms for cooperative behavior, human adults sometimes exhibit in-group bias. For example, third-party observers punish selfish behaviors committed by out-group members more harshly than similar behaviors committed by in-group members. Although evidence suggests that children begin to systematically punish selfish behavior around the age of 6 y, the development of in-group bias in their punishment remains unknown. Do children start off enforcing fairness norms impartially, or is norm enforcement biased from its emergence? How does bias change over development? Here, we created novel social groups in the laboratory and gave 6- and 8-year-olds the opportunity to engage in costly third-party punishment of selfish sharing behavior. We found that by age 6, punishment was already biased: Selfish resource allocations received more punishment when they were proposed by out-group members and when they disadvantaged in-group members. We also found that although costly punishment increased between ages 6 and 8, bias in punishment partially decreased. Although 8-y-olds also punished selfish out-group members more harshly, they were equally likely to punish on behalf of disadvantaged in-group and out-group members, perhaps reflecting efforts to enforce norms impartially. Taken together, our results suggest that norm enforcement is biased from its emergence, but that this bias can be partially overcome through developmental change.

Reducing an in-group bias in preschool children: the impact of moral behavior

How impressionable are in-group biases in early childhood? Previous research shows that young children display robust preferences for members of their own social group, but also condemn those who harm others. The current study investigates children's evaluations of agents when their group membership and moral behavior conflict. After being assigned to a minimal group, 4- to 5-year-old children either saw their in-group member behave antisocially, an out-group member act prosocially, or control agents, for whom moral information was removed. Children's explicit preference for and willingness to share with their in-group member was significantly attenuated in the presence of an antisocial in-group member, but not a prosocial out-group member. Interestingly, children's learning decisions were unmoved by a person's moral behavior, instead being consistently guided by group membership. This demonstrates that children's in-group bias is remarkably flexible: while moral information curbs children's in-group bias on social evaluations, social learning is still driven by group information.

Rigidity in gender-typed behaviors in early childhood: a longitudinal study of ethnic minority children

A key prediction of cognitive theories of gender development concerns developmental trajectories in the relative strength or rigidity of gender typing. To examine these trajectories in early childhood, 229 children (African American, Mexican American, and Dominican American) were followed annually from age 3 to 5 years, and gender-stereotypical appearance, dress-up play, toy play, and sex segregation were examined. High gender-typing was found across ethnic groups, and most behaviors increased in rigidity, especially from age 3 to 4 years. In addressing controversy surrounding the stability and structure of gender-typing it was found that from year to year, most behaviors showed moderately stable individual differences. Behaviors were uncorrelated within age but showed more concordance in change across time, suggesting that aspects of gender-typing are multidimensional, but still show coherence.

Soziales und moralisches Denken von Kindern über den Ein- und Ausschluss behinderter Kinder

Zusammenfassung:Die Studie untersucht, wie 70 Kindergartenkinder im Vergleich zu 71 Fünft- und Sechstklässler über Situationen denken, in welchen sich ein Protagonist für die Wahl eines behinderten oder nicht behinderten Kindes in seine Gruppe entscheiden musste. Die Situationen wurden nach Behinderungsform des behinderten Kindes (geistig behindert, körperbehindert) und nach Gruppenaktivität (schulisch, sozial, sportlich) variiert. Die Kinder sollten die Wahl des Protagonisten vorhersagen und die Wahl begründen. Die älteren Kinder berücksichtigten in ihren Überlegungen stärker den situativen Kontext als die jüngeren Kinder. Allerdings erwarteten sie weniger häufig den Einschluss des geistig behinderten Kindes als den Einschluss des körperbehinderten Kindes. Die Ergebnisse der Studie werden vor dem Hintergrund von Forschung zur Entwicklung sozialen und moralischen Denkens über Ein- und Ausschluss diskutiert.

It is Who You Know That Counts: Intergroup Contact and Judgments about Race-Based Exclusion

Intergroup contact and evaluations about race-based exclusion were assessed for majority and minority students in fourth, seventh, and tenth grades (N = 685). Students were presented with scenarios depicting cross-race relations in contexts of dyadic friendship, parental discomfort, and peer group disapproval. Participants reporting higher levels of intergroup contact gave higher ratings of wrongfulness of exclusion and lower frequency estimations of race-based exclusion than did participants reporting lower levels of such contact. Intergroup contact also predicted students' attributions of motives in two out of three scenarios. Findings are discussed in terms of the extant literature on peer relations, moral reasoning, and intergroup contact.

Social Understanding in Israeli-Jewish, Israeli-Palestinian, Palestinian, and Jordanian 5-year-old Children: Moral Judgments and Stereotypes

An empirical investigation was conducted of young Palestinian, Jordanian, Israeli-Palestinian, and Israeli-Jewish children's (N = 433; M = 5.7 years of age) cultural stereotypes and their evaluations of peer intergroup exclusion based upon a number of different factors, including being from a different country and speaking a different language. Children in this study live in a geographical region that has a history of cultural and religious tension, violence, and extreme intergroup conflict. Our findings revealed that the negative consequences of living with intergroup tension are related to the use of stereotypes. At the same time, the results for moral judgments and evaluations about excluding peers provided positive results about the young children's inclusive views regarding peer interactions.

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

This study investigated how Korean (N = 397) and U.S. (N = 333) children and adolescents (10 and 13 years of age) evaluated personality (aggression, shyness) and group (gender, nationality) characteristics as a basis for peer rejection in three contexts (friendship rejection, group exclusion, victimization). Overall, peer rejection based on group membership was viewed as more unfair than peer rejection based on personality traits. Children viewed friendship rejection as more legitimate than group exclusion or victimization and used more personal choice reasoning for friendship rejection than for rejection in any other context. Although there were a few cultural differences, overall, the findings provided support for the cultural generalizability of social reasoning about peer rejection.