The effect of competition on children's merit-based resource allocation: The difference between interpersonal and intergroup competition

Competition usually exists in groups in everyday interactions, but how children allocate according to competition outcomes (e.g., merit-based allocation) after intergroup competition and the difference in children's allocations of rewards between interpersonal and intergroup competition remain unclear. Children aged 3-8 years were asked to complete interpersonal or intergroup competitive games and were further asked to allocate rewards between themselves and their partners (Study 1) or between their group and the other group (Studies 2 and 3) and to reason about their decisions. We found that after interpersonal competition, children tended to conduct merit-based allocations when they won but were more inclined to conduct equal allocations when they lost; after intergroup competition, children were more inclined to make equal allocations regardless of whether they won or lost, only less than half of children followed meritorious principles. However, children conducted more merit-based allocations with age after both interpersonal and intergroup competitions. In addition, children showed less bias towards their own side after intergroup competition than after interpersonal competition. Finally, they demonstrated an earlier proclivity towards being influenced by winning outcomes than by losing outcomes after interpersonal competition, whereas a converse tendency was found after intergroup competition.

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.

Fair sharing is just caring: Links between justice sensitivity and distributive behavior in middle childhood

Justice sensitivity (JS), the tendency to perceive and adversely respond to injustice, was related to prosocial behavior in different age groups and to distributive preferences in adults. To test influences of JS on sharing and distributive preferences, middle childhood as an important phase for moral development may be particularly interesting. We asked 1320 5- to 12-year-old children (M = 8.05 years, SD = 1.02; 51.2 % girls, 1.3 % transgender and gender-nonconforming) to read five vignettes that made salient the different principles of distributive justice (equality, merit, and need) and to distribute imaginary sweets between themselves and one described child (sharing) or between two described children (distributing). Children also rated their JS, and parents rated children's theory of mind (ToM) abilities and empathy. More concerns for justice for the self (victim JS) predicted distributions following the merit principle and a preference for need over equality and merit when forced to choose among the three. Caring for justice for others (altruistic JS) predicted more sharing, equal distributions, less distributions according to the merit principle, and a preference for equal distributions over merit and need when forced to choose among the three. These associations prevailed when ToM and empathy were included as control variables. The findings underline the importance of justice-related personality traits, such as JS, for moral development in middle childhood.

White children's empathy-related responding and prosocial behavior toward White and Black children

Relations among White (non-Latinx) children's empathy-related responding, prosocial behaviors, and racial attitudes toward White and Black peers were examined. In 2017, 190 (54% boys) White 5- to 9-year-old children (M = 7.09 years, SD = 0.94) watched a series of videos that depicted social rejection of either a White or Black child. Empathy-related responses, prosocial behaviors, and racial attitudes were measured using multiple methods. Results showed that younger children showed less facial concern toward Black than White peers and greater increases with age in concern and prosocial behaviors (sharing a desirable prize) for Black, compared to White, targets. Children's facial anger increased with age for White but not Black targets. The findings can extend our understanding children's anti-racism development.

"This kid looks like he has everything": 3- to 11-year-old children's concerns for fairness and social preferences when peers differ in social class and race

This study investigated 3- to 11-year-old US children's (N = 348) perceptions of access to resources, social group preferences, and resource distribution decisions and reasoning when hypothetical peers differed in social class (poor or rich) and race (Black or White). Data were collected in 2019. The sample reflected the region where data were collected in terms of gender (44% girls, 30% boys, 1% another identity) and race and ethnicity (46% White, 10% multiracial or multiethnic, 9% Black, 5% Latinx, 2% Asian, 3% another identity), and parents reported a higher average level of education than the regional average. Results revealed both marked age differences in children's perceptions, preferences, decisions, and reasoning and specific combinations of peer group memberships that were especially likely to receive preferential treatment. With age, children perceived that rich peers had greater access to resources than poor peers, but when both peers were poor, White peers were perceived to have more resources than Black peers. Social group preferences changed with age, from mixed social class and racial group preferences, to preferences for rich peers, to dislike for rich peers. Resource allocation decisions and reasoning reflected both social group and fairness concerns: young children distributed more to White peers especially if they were also rich, participants in middle childhood explicitly favored rich peers regardless of their race, and older children distributed more to poor peers and reasoned about either moral concerns for equity or social class stereotypes. Thus, overall, younger children's responses often reflected broader economic and racial inequalities while older children often sought to create more equity, though not always for moral reasons.

Inclusion of Refugee Peers - Differences Between Own Preferences and Expectations of the Peer Group

Given the high numbers of refugees from Syria entering Germany in the recent years, the social integration of refugee youth has become an increasingly important issue in Germany. Thus, the current study examines adolescents' decisions and reasoning around the inclusion of Syrian peers in Germany. Using a hypothetical scenario, we assessed adolescents' (N = 100, M = 13.65 years, SD = 1.93, 51 females, 49 males) peer inclusion decisions and reasoning with attention to comparing inclusion of a Syrian refugee peer and a German peer. Given the importance of group norms for adolescents, we assessed not only adolescents' own inclusion decisions, but also what they would expect their peer group to decide and what they think their peer group should do. Moreover, adolescents' underlying reasoning was assessed. The analyses revealed that adolescents thought they would be more inclusive of a Syrian peer than a German peer and that their peer group should be more inclusive of a Syrian peer than a German peer. These tendencies toward including refugees were justified with references to morality as well as social-conventions. In contrast to their own decisions and to what they think their peer group should, participants expected their group would be more inclusive toward a German peer than a Syrian peer. This was mainly justified by referencing aspects of group functioning and psychological information about the peers, whereas moral and prosocial reasoning was very rarely used for the expected group decision. In sum, these findings document that adolescents in Germany wish to be inclusive regarding refugee peers and that they balance attention to morality and other domains of social reasoning when thinking about inclusion decisions while they expect that their peers will not consider morally relevant information when making these decisions. These findings have important practical implications as they indicate the importance of interventions that focus on promoting inclusive peer group norms.

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.

Analysis of Piano Performance Characteristics by Deep Learning and Artificial Intelligence and Its Application in Piano Teaching

Deep learning (DL) and artificial intelligence (AI) are jointly applied to concrete piano teaching for children to comprehensively promote modern piano teaching and improve the overall teaching quality. First, the teaching environment and the functions of the intelligent piano are expounded. Then, a piano note onset detection method is proposed based on the convolution neural network (CNN). The network can analyze the time-frequency of the input piano music signal by transforming the original time-domain waveform of the piano music signal into the frequency distribution varying with time. Besides, it can detect the note onset at a stable state after 8 × 104 iterations. Moreover, an intelligent piano teaching method is designed to teach Jingle Bells for 40 preschool children aged 4-6 years. Finally, a questionnaire survey is performed to investigate the teaching situation, including the learning interest and learning effect of children and learning feedback from parents. The results show that 80% of children like smart music scores, 82% of children like intelligent piano lessons with games, and 84% of children can learn actively in the intelligent piano class. Besides, 85% of parents believe that their children are more interested in learning piano. In general, the intelligent piano teaching method effectively combines DL with AI to realize the overall optimization of piano performance. It is widely favored by preschool children and their parents and plays an important role in improving the interest of preschool children in piano learning.

Moral Development in Adolescence

This article provides a selective review of research on moral development in adolescence during the past decade. We begin with introducing key concepts and reviewing critical theoretical advances in the field of adolescent moral development. This includes integrative models to the developmental study of morality and dynamic socialization models of moral development. Next, related major empirical findings are presented on moral emotion-behavior links, morality in intergroup contexts, and the socialization of moral development. Next, methodological innovations are presented, including new techniques to assess and analyze moral emotions and moral behaviors. We conclude by pointing to promising future directions for moral development research and practices aimed at promoting ethical growth and civic responsibility in adolescents around the globe.

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.

Outgroup prosocial behaviour among children and adolescents in conflict settings

More than 420 million children live amid political conflict. In such settings, understanding the development of prosocial behaviours, specifically directed at outgroups, can provide opportunities for peacebuilding. Informed by research on intergroup competition and structural inequality, we focus on outgroup prosocial behaviour targeting conflict rivals. Already from a young age, children are politically socialised and show intergroup biases that dampen helping behaviours towards conflict rivals, which continue into adulthood. We review factors that shape youth's interpersonal helping and broader forms of prosociality, such as civic engagement, across group lines. We conceptualise outgroup prosocial behaviour along a continuum, ranging from interpersonal acts to broader structural and cultural constructive change. We conclude with directions for future research.

Collaborative reasoning in the context of group competition

A key skill in collaborative problem-solving is to communicate and evaluate reasons for proposals to arrive at the decision benefiting all group members. Although it is well-documented that collaborative contexts facilitate young children's reasoning, less is known about whether competition with other groups contributes to children's collaborative reasoning. We investigated whether between-group competition facilitates children's within-group collaborative reasoning, regarding their production of reasons and their use of transacts, communicative acts that operate on one another's proposals and reasoning. We presented 5- and 7-year-old peer dyads with two collaborative problem-solving tasks (decorating a zoo and a dollhouse). In one task, children competed against another group (the competitive condition); whereas in the other task, they did not (non-competitive condition). Our results suggest that children's sensitivity to group competition as reflected in their reasoning changed depending on the task. When they decorated a house, they produced more transacts in the competitive condition than in the non-competitive condition; whereas when they decorated a zoo, this pattern was reversed. Thus, our results highlight that group competition did not influence children's collaborative reasoning consistently across different contexts.

Moral Psychology as a Necessary Bridge Between Social Cognition and Law

Coordinating competing interests can be difficult. Because law regulates human behavior, it is a candidate mechanism for creating coordination in the face of societal disagreement. We argue that findings from moral psychology are necessary to understand why law can effectively resolve co-occurring conflicts related to punishment and group membership. First, we discuss heterogeneity in punitive thought, focusing on punishment within the United States legal system. Though the law exerts a weak influence on punitive ideologies before punishment occurs, we argue that it effectively coordinates perceptions of individuals who have already been punished. Next, we discuss intergroup conflict, which often co-occurs with disagreements related to punishment and represents a related domain where coordination can be difficult to achieve. Here, we underscore how insights from moral psychology can promote equality via the law. These examples demonstrate how contributions from moral psychology are necessary to understand the connection between social cognition and law.

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).

Children and adolescents coordinate group and moral concerns within different goal contexts when allocating resources

Coordinating complex social and moral concerns when allocating resources is a key issue in late childhood and early adolescence. This study explored resource allocation in three goal contexts that required children to focus to differing degrees on moral and group concerns. Children (9-11-years, M^age = 9.84, n = 190) and adolescents (14-16-years, M^age = 14.92, n = 154) were informed their school peer group held an in-group norm (competition, cooperation). Participants allocated resources between their in-group and an outgroup within one of three goal contexts (prosocial, learning-focused, and group-focused). Participants allocated in favour of their in-group to achieve a prosocial goal but attenuated this when the goal was focused on learning and cooperation. Adolescents, more than children, reasoned about the goals of resource allocation to justify their decisions. From 9 years old, children begin to coordinate peer group norms and goal information when deciding how to allocate resources within intergroup contexts.

Fairness, prosociality, hypocrisy, and happiness: Children's and adolescents' motives for showing unselfish behaviour and positive emotions

The present study examined what motives account for age-related decreases in selfish behaviour and whether these motives equally predict positive emotions when making a moral decision. The study was based on a sample of 190 children and adolescents (101 females) from three different age groups (childhood, early adolescence, and middle adolescence, M = 12.9 years, SD = 2.58). A decision-making task was used where participants chose between (1) maximizing their own self-interest versus (2) being prosocial, (3) being fair, or (4) appearing fair while avoiding the costs of actually being fair. Overall, prosociality and fairness were equally important motives for unselfish behaviour. At the same time, the importance of fairness motivation increased with age. Hypocrisy motivation was less frequent than expected by chance. Prosociality was most strongly and positively associated with self-rated happiness about the decision, whereas the opposite was found for individuals who were motivated by fairness. Overall, the study indicates that children's or adolescents' unselfish behaviour in decision-making tasks are driven by a variety of motives with diverse emotional implications. The relative importance of these motives changes over the course of development. STATEMENT OF CONTRIBUTION: What is already known on this subject? Older children behave less selfishly in resource allocation tasks. Prosocial behaviour is associated with positive emotions. What the present study adds? Unselfish behaviour is equally motivated by fairness and prosociality. Fairness motivation increases from childhood throughout adolescence. Decisions motivated by prosociality are experienced as more positive than decisions motivated by fairness.