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.