Adolescents' social and moral reasoning about COVID-19 public health behaviors

Examining the forms of social and moral reasoning adolescents use is important for understanding youth engagement with public health guidelines. The present work examined adolescents' perceptions of social norms and associated reasoning in the COVID-19 context. Participants (n = 127, M age = 17.00, SD = 0.71) negatively evaluated other teenagers who broke COVID-19 guidelines and reasoned about harm reduction to justify breaking these rules, but also recognised the importance of protecting mental health as one reason to spend time with friends counter to these rules. Further, adolescents reported that they were more likely to engage in public health behaviors compared to their peers or the average teenager, suggesting a social norm of lower engagement with these guidelines. Together, this evidence documents the importance of considering social norms and moral reasoning in framing communication efforts that target adolescents' adherence to public health guidelines.

Neuroanatomical correlates of system-justifying ideologies: a pre-registered voxel-based morphometry study on right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation

System-justifying ideologies are a cluster of ideals that perpetuate a hierarchical social system despite being fraught with inequalities. Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are two ideologies that have received much attention in the literature separately and together. Given that these ideologies are considered to be stable individual differences that are likely to have an evolutionary basis, there has yet to be any examination for volumetric brain structures associated with these variables. Here, we proposed an investigation of overlapping and non-overlapping brain regions associated with RWA and SDO in a sample recruited in Singapore. Indeed, it will be interesting to determine how RWA and SDO correlate in a country that proactively promotes institutionalized multi-culturalism such as Singapore. RWA and SDO scores were collected via self-report measures from healthy individuals (39 males and 43 females; age 25.89 ± 5.68 years). Consequently, voxel-based morphometry (VBM) whole brain and region of interest (ROI) analyses were employed to identify neuroanatomical correlates of these system-justifying ideologies. RWA and SDO scores were strongly correlated despite the low ideological contrast in Singapore's sociopolitical context. The whole brain analysis did not reveal any significant clusters associated with either RWA or SDO. The ROI analyses revealed clusters in the bilateral amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) that were associated with both RWA and SDO scores, whereas two clusters in the left anterior insula were negatively associated with only SDO scores. The study corroborates the claim of RWA and SDO as stable individual differences with identifiable neuroanatomical correlates, but our exploratory analysis suggests evidence that precludes any definitive conclusion based on the present evidence.

Neuroanatomical correlates of system-justifying ideologies: a pre-registered voxel-based morphometry study on right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation

System-justifying ideologies are a cluster of ideals that perpetuate a hierarchical social system despite being fraught with inequalities. Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are two ideologies that have received much attention in the literature separately and together. Given that these ideologies are considered to be stable individual differences that are likely to have an evolutionary basis, there has yet to be any examination for volumetric brain structures associated with these variables. Here, we proposed an investigation of overlapping and non-overlapping brain regions associated with RWA and SDO in a sample recruited in Singapore. Indeed, it will be interesting to determine how RWA and SDO correlate in a country that proactively promotes institutionalized multi-culturalism such as Singapore. RWA and SDO scores were collected via self-report measures from healthy individuals (39 males and 43 females; age 25.89 ± 5.68 years). Consequently, voxel-based morphometry (VBM) whole brain and region of interest (ROI) analyses were employed to identify neuroanatomical correlates of these system-justifying ideologies. RWA and SDO scores were strongly correlated despite the low ideological contrast in Singapore's sociopolitical context. The whole brain analysis did not reveal any significant clusters associated with either RWA or SDO. The ROI analyses revealed clusters in the bilateral amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) that were associated with both RWA and SDO scores, whereas two clusters in the left anterior insula were negatively associated with only SDO scores. The study corroborates the claim of RWA and SDO as stable individual differences with identifiable neuroanatomical correlates, but our exploratory analysis suggests evidence that precludes any definitive conclusion based on the present evidence.

Effects of Ingroup Identification on Ingroup Favouritism during Fairness Norm Enforcement

People tend to voluntarily sacrifice their own interests to reject unfair proposals, and this behaviour is affected by group affiliation. While group bias is a well-established phenomenon, its direction is still unclear, and little attention has been given to possible moderating factors. In two studies, we manipulate participants' ingroup identification and investigate whether and how individuals with various levels of ingroup identification react differently to unfairness from ingroups and outgroups during an incentivized (Study 1, N = 46) and hypothetical (Study 2, N = 332) ultimatum game. The results show that participants display a strong preference for their own group. High identifiers tend to accept unfair proposals from ingroups compared to outgroups, whereas this effect is nonsignificant for low identifiers, especially for moderately unfair treatment (offer 7:3). Moreover, higher identification tends to be accompanied by higher ingroup positive expectation, which then leads to greater ingroup favouritism for an offer of 7:3. These results imply that ingroup identification can enhance group favouritism during fairness norm enforcement through ingroup positive expectation.

A Model to Explore how Communal Traits Affects Stay Intent Amongst Taiwanese Nurses

Aims

This study discusses the model built to explore low levels of communal traits’ influence on nurses’ stay intent.

Background

The high turnover rate and low stay intent amongst Taiwan's nurses is a serious issue. One reason for the low stay intent is nurse-to-nurse interpersonal conflict. Surface-level difference, such as low levels of communal traits, may be an important antecedent factor. Previous studies have found that this type of conflict can frequently arise in female-to-female relationships.

Design

This was quantitative, cross-sectional research using a questionnaire survey.

Method

249 registered nurses participated in the survey, which employed convenience sampling. The data was collected from January 10th 2020 to February 10th 2020. Results/Findings: We found that nurses with low levels of communal traits become frustrated, creating psychological need thwarting and decreasing stay intention. Belonging perception appears to weaken this. In addition, autonomy and relatedness of need thwarting but not competence mediates the relationship between frustration experience and stay intent. Unlike in past studies, this was not found to be an exclusively female phenomenon.

Conclusion

Improving belonging perception may be the answer to overcoming negative outcomes caused by surface-level difference in the nursing profession. However, why surface-level difference has a negative influence remains a question that needs to be further explored. In addition, Taiwanese nursing managers in this low status and relationship-oriented nursing culture should also focus on improving frontline nurses’ confidence and self-conceptualizations.

Punishment Reactions to Powerful Suspects

Abstract. This study aimed to replicate the intuitive retributivism hypothesis, according to which people’s punitive sentiments are predominantly driven by retributive concerns. Contrary to prior research that focuses on how people punish offenders, this study investigated how people punish individuals suspected of immoralities. Moreover, we manipulated a suspect’s power level (high/low/undefined) and stated contrasting hypotheses (the “power corrupts” approach vs. the “power leniency” approach) regarding the impact of power on punishment motives. Finally, we investigated the mediating role of recidivism and guilt likelihood in these effects. The results replicated the intuitive retributivism hypothesis and revealed the robustness of this effect. Moreover, in line with the “power corrupts” approach, we found that the role of utilitarian (but not retributive or restorative) motives is stronger in the punishment of powerful suspects as opposed to powerless ones. Unexpectedly, neither guilt likelihood nor recidivism of a suspect mediated the effects of power on punishment motives.

Motives for punishing powerful vs. prestigious offenders: The moderating role of group identity

Status can be seen as power over valued resources or as prestige that lies in the eyes of the beholder. In the present research, we examine how power versus prestige influence observers' punishing motives. Possession of power implies the capacity to harm and elicits threat and therefore should trigger stronger incapacitative motives for punishing an offender. In contrast, prestige signals the observer's admiration of the target and therefore should elicit a strong motivation to help an offender reintegrate into society. Studies 1 and 2 manipulated an offender's status (power vs. prestige vs. control) and group identity (ingroup vs. outgroup). Supporting our hypotheses, both studies revealed that observers had stronger incapacitative motivations towards powerful as opposed to prestigious offenders, particularly when the offender came from the ingroup. Study 2 also showed that observers had stronger restorative motives towards a prestigious as opposed to powerful offender. Contrary to expectations, group identity did not moderate the effect of status on observer's restorative motives. Study 3 manipulated power and prestige separately and showed that power elicits stronger incapacitative motives through ingroup threat and perceived capacity to harm. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

The imaginary friends of my friends: Imagined contact interventions which highlight supportive social norms reduce children’s antirefugee bias

Fostering inclusive attitudes among children in host classrooms is key to integrating refugee children. A field experiment tests the prejudice reduction effects of a teacher-led activity integrating imagined intergroup contact and normative influence. To enhance the effectiveness of imagined contact, scenarios include supportive ingroup norms. In 29 classes, 545 children ( Mage = 10.88, SD = 0.96) were randomly assigned to one of five conditions: standard imagined contact, imagined contact encouraged by family, class peers, or religious ingroups, or a control. Children in all norm-framed imagined contact conditions had significantly less antirefugee bias compared with the control. The class-peer norm frame significantly reduced affective and cognitive facets of bias. The family norm frame reduced affective bias, and the religious norm frame reduced cognitive bias. Standard imagined contact did not differ from the control. Potential mediating pathways are explored. These findings illustrate the utility of incorporating norms into imagined contact interventions to reduce antirefugee bias among schoolchildren.

Truth and lies in your eyes: Pupil dilation of White participants in truthful and deceptive responses to White and Black partners

In the present study, we examined the pupillary response of White participants who were asked to tell the truth or lie to White or Black partners. Research on cues to deception has assumed that lying is more cognitively demanding that truth telling. In line with this assumption, previous studies have shown that lying is associated with greater pupil dilation, a behavioral cue that typically manifests itself under conditions of stress or cognitive effort. In accordance with these results, we predicted greater pupil dilation when lying than when telling the truth. Furthermore, pupil dilation was expected to be greater when responding to White than Black partners. Finally, we hypothesized that pupil dilation would be greater when lying to White than Black partners. Participants were instructed to answer a set of questions, half truthfully and half deceptively. They were led to believe that White vs. Black partners (one male and one female) would ask the questions via computer connection. Indeed, we used feminine and masculine synthetic voices. Pupil dilation was assessed with a remote eye-tracking system. Results provided support for the first two hypotheses. However, the predicted interaction between race of partners and truth status of message (lying vs. telling the truth) was nonsignificant. Our findings highlight the importance of considering race in the study of truthful and deceptive communications.

Multi-Disciplinary Trauma Evaluation and Management Simulation (MD-TEAMS) training for emergency medicine and general surgery residents

BACKGROUND

Successful trauma resuscitation relies on multi-disciplinary collaboration. In most academic programs, general surgery (GS) and emergency medicine (EM) residents rarely train together before functioning as a team.

METHODS

In our Multi-Disciplinary Trauma Evaluation and Management Simulation (MD-TEAMS), EM and GS residents completed manikin-based trauma scenarios and were evaluated on resuscitation and communication skills. Residents were surveyed on confidence surrounding training objectives.

RESULTS

Residents showed improved confidence running trauma scenarios in multi-disciplinary teams. Residents received lower communication scores from same-discipline vs cross-discipline faculty. EM residents scored higher in evaluation and planning domains; GS residents scored higher in action processes; groups scored equally in team management. Strong correlation existed between team leader communication and resuscitative skill completion.

CONCLUSION

MD-TEAMS demonstrated correlation between communication and resuscitation checklist item completion and communication differences by resident specialty. In the future, we plan to evaluate training-related resident behavior changes and specialty-specific communication differences by residents.

Why do children essentialize social groups?

The tendency to essentialize social groups is universal, and arises early in development. This tendency is associated with negative intergroup attitudes and behaviors, and has thus encouraged the search for remedies for the emergence of essentialism. In this vein, great attention has been devoted to uncovering the cognitive foundations of essentialism. In this chapter, I suggest that attention should also be turned toward the motivational foundations of essentialism. I propose that considerations of power and group identity, but especially a "need to belong," may encourage children's essentialization of social groups. Namely, from a young age, children are keen to feel members of a group, and that their membership is secure and exclusive. Essentialism is the conceptual gadget that satisfies these feelings. And to the extent that groups are defined by what they do, this motivated essentialism also impels children to be adamant about the maintenance of unique group behaviors.

Children's evaluations of deviant peers in the context of science and technology: The role of gender group norms and status

•

Boys negatively evaluate peers who challenge group norms related to computing.

•

Children expect groups to negatively evaluate challenges to science gender norms.

•

Perceptions of group evaluation predict how boys individually evaluate their peers.

Women are drastically underrepresented within computer science, which is in part informed by societal ideas of who can and should belong in the sciences. Less is known about how children evaluate their peers who challenge gendered expectations of who can and should take part in computer science. The current study asked children (N = 213; 110 girls) in middle childhood (M_age = 8.71 years; n = 108) and late childhood (M_age = 10.56 years; n = 105) to evaluate a gender-matched peer who challenged a group norm related to either computer science (male-gendered domain) or biology (less male-gendered domain). Male participants most negatively evaluated a peer who wanted to take part in a biology activity when the rest of the group wanted to do a programming activity. Furthermore, male participants expected their group to negatively evaluate this deviant peer in the programming condition. Mediation analysis revealed that for boys in the computer science condition, perceived group evaluation predicted individual evaluation. Female participants, in contrast, did not negatively evaluate someone who challenged a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) peer group norm. This study demonstrates that male peer groups may perpetuate the idea that computer science is for men through negative evaluation of in-group members who challenge those ideas and, in turn, maintain their dominant position as the high-status group. Achieving equity in the computer science field will require a greater understanding of these peer group norms.

How intergroup relation moderates group bias in Third-Party Punishment

Two experiments were conducted to investigate how intergroup relation moderates group bias in Third-Party Punishment (TPP) of selfishness. Participants competed or cooperated with the other group and then performed a TPP task in which they could reduce an allocator's benefits after paying a low cost (paying 1/3 unit deducts 1 unit of the allocator in Experiment 1, n = 76) or a high cost (paying 1 unit deducts 1 unit of the allocator in Experiment 2, n = 81). The results supported the "mere-preference hypothesis" of group bias, showing that people were more likely to tolerate their ingroups while punishing outgroups more harshly. Furthermore, when the cost was low, competition increased people's punishment toward outgroups' selfishness but not toward ingroup members, thus enlarging the group bias. When the cost was high, however, this effect disappeared, indicating that people consider a "cost-to-impact ratio" when selectively enforcing the fairness norm in intergroup conflicts. Our findings suggest how intergroup relation and cost-benefit analysis interact together to influence the group bias in TPP, providing insights into mechanisms underlying the maintenance of fairness norms and decision-making in a group context.

Don't forget the group! The importance of social norms and empathy for shaping donation behaviour

Feelings of empathy and the influence of social descriptive norms are related to intentions to donate. People are more likely to help and donate to others when they empathise with them, and when they perceive descriptive norms to encourage such behaviour. However, previous work has not considered the potential interplay between empathy and descriptive norms. Across two surveys in two different national settings (Ns = 1300 and 144), we assessed the interplay between empathy and social descriptive norms on frequency of donation (Study 1) and on willingness to donate (Study 2). Consistent with our main hypotheses, in Studies 1 and 2, norms and empathy were positive predictors of frequency of donation and willingness to donate. Importantly, a consistent interaction between norms and empathy was found in both studies. Empathy was a stronger predictor of donation behaviour and disposition when norms were low. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed.

Justice reactions to deviant ingroup members: Ingroup identity threat motivates utilitarian punishments

To maintain a positive overall view of their group, people judge likeable ingroup members more favourably and deviant ingroup members more harshly than comparable outgroup members. Research suggests that such derogation of deviant ingroup members aims to restore the image of the group by symbolically excluding so‐called ‘black sheeps’. We hypothesized that information about a harm‐doer's group membership influences observers’ justice‐seeking reactions. Motives for punishment vary based on whether the goal is to punish past harm‐doing (i.e., retributive motives), help harm‐doers recognize the harm inflicted and reintegrate into society (i.e., restorative motives), or control harm‐doer's future behaviour through incapacitating practices and exclusion from society (i.e., utilitarian motives). We hypothesized that immoral behaviours by ingroup rather than outgroup members jeopardize the group's reputation and therefore activate utilitarian (i.e., exclusion‐oriented) motives for punishment. Study 1 (N = 187) confirmed that people displayed more utilitarian motives and less restorative motives when sanctioning an ingroup as opposed to an outgroup harm‐doer. Study 2 (N = 122) manipulated typicality to the ingroup. Participants displayed stronger utilitarian (i.e., exclusion‐oriented) punishment motives when the harm‐doer was presented as a typical ingroup rather than an outgroup member. Study 3 (N = 292) replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2 and further showed that people displayed stronger utilitarian punishments against an ingroup offender through the experience of increased identity threat. Contrary to our expectations, observers’ ingroup identification did not moderate the effect of group membership or typicality to the ingroup on justice reactions. Yet, ingroup identification influenced both experienced identity threat (i.e., mediator) and utilitarian motives for punishment with high identifiers experiencing higher threat and displaying stronger utilitarian punishment motive. We discuss the results in terms of people's concern for the protection of their group identity.

Condoning discrimination: The effects of dominance and authoritarianism are moderated by different ways of reasoning about antigay discriminatory acts

Many studies have focused on mediated paths by which social dominance orientation (SDO) and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) predict prejudice; fewer have identified factors that moderate their effects. We applied social cognitive domain theory to test whether different ways of reasoning about antigay discriminatory acts moderated the association between SDO, RWA, and condoning antigay discrimination. Moral reasoning (e.g., emphasizing fairness, equality) and personal reasoning (e.g., emphasizing individual interests, qualifications) attenuated the association between SDO, RWA, and condoning discriminatory resource denial in general and religious-specific contexts. Conventional reasoning (e.g., emphasizing group norms, rules) magnified the association between SDO, RWA, and condoning resource denial, but only in a religious-specific context. Findings highlight the need to examine moderators of SDO and RWA effects in effort to disrupt discrimination by those most likely to engage in it.

Children's developing metaethical judgments

Human adults incline toward moral objectivism but may approach things more relativistically if different cultures are involved. In this study, 4-, 6-, and 9-year-old children (N=136) witnessed two parties who disagreed about moral matters: a normative judge (e.g., judging that it is wrong to do X) and an antinormative judge (e.g., judging that it is okay to do X). We assessed children's metaethical judgment, that is, whether they judged that only one party (objectivism) or both parties (relativism) could be right. We found that 9-year-olds, but not younger children, were more likely to judge that both parties could be right when a normative ingroup judge disagreed with an antinormative extraterrestrial judge (with different preferences and background) than when the antinormative judge was another ingroup individual. This effect was not found in a comparison case where parties disagreed about the possibility of different physical laws. These findings suggest that although young children often exhibit moral objectivism, by early school age they begin to temper their objectivism with culturally relative metaethical judgments.

Children's Intergroup Relations and Attitudes

The existence of warm, intimate, supportive, and egalitarian relationships between members of differing social outgroups is likely, at the societal level, to facilitate cooperation and cohesion, and at the individual level, to promote positive social, educational, and occupational outcomes. The developmental pathway from intergroup contact to intergroup attitudes as it operates among children is not, however, well understood. In our chapter, we review and integrate selected social and developmental science related to intergroup relations and attitudes with the goal of proposing a conceptual model of the pathway from intergroup contact to positive intergroup attitudes among youth.

Membership role and subjective group dynamics: Impact on evaluative intragroup differentiation and commitment to prescriptive norms

Two studies examined participants’ evaluations of ingroup or outgroup normative and deviant members and changes in agreement with a prescriptive norm. In Experiment 1 ( N = 51), the normative target was either a full or marginal ingroup or outgroup member, and the deviant was a full member. In Experiment 2 ( N = 113), both targets were full or marginal members, or one was a full member and the other was marginal. As predicted, maximal upgrading of normative members and downgrading of deviant members, as well as endorsement of the norm, occurred when both targets were full ingroup members. In contrast, the deviant was derogated least and the deviant’s position was endorsed most when the deviant target was a full ingroup member and the normative target was a marginal ingroup member. Evaluations of normative and deviant ingroup members mediated the effects of their role on participants’ agreement with the norm.

Moral parochialism and contextual contingency across seven societies

Human moral judgement may have evolved to maximize the individual's welfare given parochial culturally constructed moral systems. If so, then moral condemnation should be more severe when transgressions are recent and local, and should be sensitive to the pronouncements of authority figures (who are often arbiters of moral norms), as the fitness pay-offs of moral disapproval will primarily derive from the ramifications of condemning actions that occur within the immediate social arena. Correspondingly, moral transgressions should be viewed as less objectionable if they occur in other places or times, or if local authorities deem them acceptable. These predictions contrast markedly with those derived from prevailing non-evolutionary perspectives on moral judgement. Both classes of theories predict purportedly species-typical patterns, yet to our knowledge, no study to date has investigated moral judgement across a diverse set of societies, including a range of small-scale communities that differ substantially from large highly urbanized nations. We tested these predictions in five small-scale societies and two large-scale societies, finding substantial evidence of moral parochialism and contextual contingency in adults' moral judgements. Results reveal an overarching pattern in which moral condemnation reflects a concern with immediate local considerations, a pattern consistent with a variety of evolutionary accounts of moral judgement.

Evaluations of moral and conventional intergroup transgressions

To investigate children's understanding of intergroup transgressions, children (3-8 years, N = 84) evaluated moral and conventional transgressions that occurred among members of the same gender group (ingroup) or members of different gender groups (outgroup). All participants judged moral transgressions to be more wrong than conventional transgressions. However, when asked to make a judgment after being told an authority figure did not see the transgression, younger participants still judged that moral violations were less acceptable than conventional transgressions, but judged both moral and conventional transgressions with an outgroup victim as more acceptable than the corresponding transgressions with an ingroup victim. Older children did not demonstrate the same ingroup bias; rather they focused only on the domain of the transgressions. The results demonstrate the impact intergroup information has on children's evaluations about both moral and conventional transgressions.

Group bias in cooperative norm enforcement

A hallmark of human social cognition is the tendency for both adults and children to favour members of their own groups. Critically, this in-group bias exerts a strong influence on cooperative decision-making: people (i) tend to share more with members of their in-group and (ii) differentially enforce fairness norms depending on the group membership of their interaction partners. But why do people show these group biases in cooperation? One possibility is that the enforcement of cooperative norm violations is an evolved mechanism supporting within-group cooperation (Norms-Focused Hypothesis). Alternatively, group bias in cooperation could be a by-product of more general affective preferences for in-group members (Mere Preferences Hypothesis). Here, we appraise evidence from studies of both adults and children with the goal of understanding whether one of these two accounts is better supported by existing data. While the pattern of evidence is complex, much of it is broadly consistent with the Mere Preferences Hypothesis and little is uniquely supportive of the Norms-Focused Hypothesis. We highlight possible reasons for this complexity and suggest ways that future work can continue to help us understand the important relationship between group bias and cooperation.

Racial attitude (dis)similarity and liking in same-race minority interactions

Two studies investigate the relationship between racial attitude (dis)similarity and interpersonal liking for racial minorities and Whites in same-race and cross-race pairs. In nationally representative and local samples, minorities report personally caring about racial issues more than Whites do (Pilot Study), which we theorize makes racial attitude divergence with ingroup members especially disruptive. Both established friendships (Study 1) and face-to-face interactions among strangers (Study 2) provided evidence for the dissimilarity-repulsion hypothesis in same-race interactions for minorities but not Whites. For minorities, disagreeing with a minority partner or friend about racial attitudes decreased their positivity toward that person. Because minorities typically report caring about race more than Whites, same-race friendships involving shared racial attitudes may be particularly critical sources of social support for them, particularly in predominately White contexts. Understanding challenges that arise in same-race interactions, not just cross-race interactions, can help create environments in which same-race minority friendships flourish.

Children's prosocial behavioural intentions towards outgroup members

When will children decide to help outgroup peers? We examined how intergroup competition, social perspective taking (SPT), and empathy influence children's (5-10 years, N = 287) prosocial intentions towards outgroup members. Study 1 showed that, in a minimal group situation, prosociality was lower in an intergroup competitive than in a non-competitive or interpersonal context. Study 2 revealed that, in a real groups situation involving intergroup competition, prosociality was associated with higher empathy and lower competitive motivation. In a subsequent non-competitive context, there were age differences in the impact of SPT and competitive motivation. With age, relationships strengthened between SPT and prosociality (positively) and between competitiveness and prosociality (negatively). Among older children, there was a carry-over effect whereby feelings of intergroup competitiveness aroused by the intergroup competitive context suppressed outgroup prosociality in the following non-competitive context. Theoretical and practical implications for improving children's intergroup relationships are discussed.

Political Violence and Adolescent Out-group Attitudes and Prosocial Behaviors: Implications for Positive Inter-group Relations

The negative impact of political violence on adolescent adjustment is well-established. Less is known about factors that affect adolescents' positive outcomes in ethnically-divided societies, especially influences on prosocial behaviors toward the outgroup, which may promote constructive relations. For example, understanding how intergroup experiences and attitudes motivate outgroup helping may foster intergroup cooperation and help to consolidate peace. The current study investigated adolescents' overall and outgroup prosocial behaviors across two time points in Belfast, Northern Ireland (N = 714 dyads; 49% male; Time 1: M = 14.7, SD = 2.0, years old). Controlling for Time 1 prosocial behaviors, age and gender, multivariate structural equation modeling showed that experience with intergroup sectarian threat predicted fewer outgroup prosocial behaviors at Time 2 at the trend level. On the other hand, greater experience of intragroup nonsectarian threat at Time 1 predicted more overall and outgroup prosocial behaviors at Time 2. Moreover, positive outgroup attitudes strengthened the link between intragroup threat and outgroup prosocial behaviors one year later. Finally, experience with intragroup nonsectarian threat and outgroup prosocial behaviors at Time 1 was related to more positive outgroup attitudes at Time 2. The implications for youth development and intergroup relations in post-accord societies are discussed.

Children's responses to social atypicality among group members - advantages of a contextualized social developmental account

Abrams, Rutland, Palmer, Ferrell, and Pelletier (2014) showed that better second-order mental state understanding facilitates 6-7-year-olds' ability to link a partially disloyal child's atypicality to inclusive or exclusive reactions by in-group or outgroup members. This finding is interpreted in terms of predictions from the developmental subjective group dynamics model. We respond to thoughtful commentaries by Rhodes and Chalik, Patterson, and Rakoczy. Children face a significant developmental challenge in becoming able to recognize and interpret social atypicality in intergroup contexts. Researching that ability to contextualize judgements raises new questions about the nature of peer inclusion and exclusion, about children's social cognition, and about the way that social cognitive development and social experience combine. Rather than individual-focused cognition taking priority over category-based cognition, we argue the two become more systematically integrated during development. We note that loyalty is but one example of typicality, and we also consider the role of more advanced perspective taking among older children, and the role of multiple classification skill among younger children, as well as potential implications for intervention to reduce peer victimization and prejudice.