The present study examined the interactive effects of school norms, peer norms, and accountability on children's intergroup attitudes. Participants (n = 229) aged 5-11 years, in a between-subjects design, were randomly assigned to a peer group with an inclusion or exclusion norm. They learnt their school either had an inclusion norm or not and were accountable to either their peer group, teachers or to nobody. Findings indicated, irrespective of age, that an inclusive school norm was less effective when the peer group had an exclusive norm and children were held accountable to their peers or teachers. These findings support Social Identity Development Theory (Nesdale, 2004(Nesdale, , 2007 which expects both the in-group peer and school norm to influence children's intergroup attitudes.

No abstract

Cooperation is a fundamental drive of moral behavior from infancy, yet competitive intergroup contexts can exert a significant influence on resource allocation behavior in childhood. The present study explored how ingroup and outgroup norms of competition and cooperation influenced the allocation of resources between groups among children and adolescents, along with how they reasoned about these allocations. Ingroup norms combined, for the first time, with outgroup norms were manipulated to examine their effect on the development of intergroup resource allocation. Participants aged 8 to 16-years (n = 229) were told that their ingroup and the outgroup held either a competitive or cooperative norm about how they should behave in an arts competition. They then allocated tokens for expenditure in the competition between the two teams, and provided social reasoning to justify their chosen allocations. Results showed a negative outgroup norm of competition lead to significantly more ingroup bias when the ingroup also held a competitive rather than a cooperative norm.In contrast, a positive outgroup norm of cooperation did not result in significantly less ingroup bias when the ingroup also held a cooperative norm. Additionally adolescents, unlike children who allocated equally were more likely to make reference to fair competition, a form of moral reasoning, in the competitive compared to the cooperative ingroup norm condition.This study showed that children and adolescents considered both ingroup and outgroup norms simultaneously when making intergroup resource allocations, but that only adolescents varied their reasoning to justify these allocation in line with group norms.

The present study investigated age-related changes in the intergroup allocation of resources depending on whether the ingroup norm was competitive or cooperative. Participants included children ( = 8.69), adolescents ( = 13.81), and adults ( = 20.89), ( = 263) who were inducted into simulated groups and informed about an ingroup norm of either cooperation or competition. The goal context for the resource allocation task was either prosocial (to benefit the welfare of animals in a charity event) or group focused (to win a national interschool competition). They were then asked to allocate resources between an ingroup and outgroup, and to justify their allocation. The findings showed that children allocated significantly more resources to their ingroup in order to achieve a prosocial goal, but only when the ingroup norm was competitive. In contrast, adolescents and adults allocated resources equally irrespective of the ingroup norm. These findings showed that children prioritized the moral goal of welfare over that of fairness when their ingroup favored competition, while adolescents and adults always prioritized fairness. Older participants justified their equal allocation with greater reference to the importance of fair competition. This study demonstrated an important developmental shift in how the prioritization of moral goals during intergroup resource allocation is influenced by ingroup norms of competition and cooperation. (PsycINFO Database Record

Children's and adolescents’ resource allocation was examined in a context of inequality between schools and a peer group norm of either equality or equity. Participants (N = 257; children, 7–11 years old and adolescents, 13–16 years old) were inducted into groups with either a lot (advantaged) or few (disadvantaged) art resources, in the context of an art competition. Participants were prescribed an equality (equal distribution) or equity (more resources for disadvantaged groups) norm, before allocating resources between groups. Adolescents, but not children, allocated significantly more resources to their disadvantaged in‐group than they did to a disadvantaged out‐group, particularly when prescribed an in‐group norm of equity. Participants who rectified the inequality referred to the unfair nature of the initial disparity. The findings revealed an important developmental shift between middle childhood and early adolescence regarding the influence of group status and norms on intergroup resource allocation in a competitive context. What is already known on this subject? Children have the capacity to challenge intergroup resource allocation inequalities. Peer group norms can guide resource allocation in situations where inequality is not made salient. What does this study add? A peer group equity norm can guide adolescents to rectify an intergroup inequality. Relative peer group advantage plays an increasingly important role in adolescence. For children, maintaining equality can supersede adherence to a peer group norm.

The present study examined how peer group norms influence children's evaluations of deviant ingroup members. Following the manipulation of competitive or cooperative norms, participants (children, M = 8.69; adolescents, M = 13.81; adults, M = 20.89; n = 263) evaluated deviant ingroup members from their own and the group's perspective. Children rated cooperative deviancy positively and believed their group would do the same. Adolescents and adults believed that their group would negatively evaluate cooperative deviancy when their group supported a competitive allocation strategy. Reasoning varied based on norm and participants' agreement with deviancy. Understanding an ingroup may not be favorable toward a cooperative deviant in a competitive context is a developmental challenge requiring the coordination of social and moral norms.

Humans care for the well-being of some animals (e.g., dogs) yet tacitly endorse the maltreatment of others (e.g., pigs). What treatment is deemed morally appropriate for an animal can depend on whether the animal is characterized as “food.” When such categorization of animals emerges and when a moral hierarchy of beings depending on their species membership (speciesism) develops is poorly understood. We investigate this development across samples of children (9–11 years old), young adults (18–21 years old), and adults (29–59 years old; total N = 479). Compared with young adults and adults, children (a) show less speciesism, (b) are less likely to categorize farm animals as food than pets, (c) think farm animals ought to be treated better, and (d) deem eating meat and animal products to be less morally acceptable. These findings imply that there are key age-related differences in our moral view of an animal worth that point to socially constructed development over the lifespan.

Adolescence represents a developmental period of waning academic motivation, particularly in STEM domains. To combat this, better understanding the factors that might foster STEM motivation and interest is of importance. Social factors like social competencies and feelings of belonging become increasingly important in adolescence. The current study investigated structural relations between social competencies, feelings of belonging to an informal STEM learning program, math and science efficacy and interest in a sample of 268 adolescents (M age = 15.25; 66.8% girls; 42.5% White British or European American, 25.7% South Asian British or Asian American, 15.7% Afro-Caribbean Black British or African American 5.6% Bi-racial, and 3.0% other). Adolescents were recruited from six different informal learning sites (e.g., science museums, zoos, or aquariums) in the United States (n = 147) and the United Kingdom (n = 121). The results revealed positive relations between social competencies and belonging, and between belonging and math and science efficacy and interest. Further, the results also indicated a positive indirect effect of social competencies on efficacy and interest, via belonging. These findings have implications for guiding informal STEM programming in ways that can enhance STEM motivation and interest.