Aline Hitti

Social exclusion in childhood: a developmental intergroup perspective

Interpersonal rejection and intergroup exclusion in childhood reflect different, but complementary, aspects of child development. Interpersonal rejection focuses on individual differences in personality traits, such as wariness and being fearful, to explain bully-victim relationships. In contrast, intergroup exclusion focuses on how in-group and out-group attitudes contribute to social exclusion based on group membership, such as gender, race, ethnicity, culture, and nationality. It is proposed that what appears to be interpersonal rejection in some contexts may, in fact, reflect intergroup exclusion. Whereas interpersonal rejection research assumes that victims invite rejection, intergroup exclusion research proposes that excluders reject members of out-groups to maintain status differences. A developmental intergroup social exclusion framework is described, one that focuses on social reasoning, moral judgment, and group identity.

Development of Intra- and Intergroup Judgments in the Context of Moral and Social-Conventional Norms.

Children and adolescents evaluated group inclusion and exclusion in the context of generic and group-specific norms involving morality and social conventions. Participants (N = 381), aged 9.5 and 13.5 years, judged an in-group members decision to deviate from the norms of the group, whom to include, and whether their personal preference was the same as what they expected a group should do. Deviating from in-group moral norms about unequal allocation of resources was viewed more positively than deviating from conventional norms about nontraditional dress codes. With age, participants gave priority to group-specific norms and differentiated what the group should do from their own preference about the groups decision, revealing a developmental picture about childrens complex understanding of group dynamics and group norms.

When Does the In-Group Like the Out-Group? Bias Among Children as a Function of Group Norms:

Research indicates that in-group favoritism is prevalent among both adults and children. Although research has documented that individuals do not consistently display an in-group bias, the conditions under which out-group preference exists are not well understood. In this study, participants (N = 462) aged 9 to 16 years judged in-group deviant acts that were either in line with or counter to a generic norm shared by both groups. The findings demonstrated, for the first time, that children preferred out-group over in-group deviance only when the in-group peer’s deviance was in line with the generic norm and a threat to their group’s identity. Participants justified their disapproval of these deviants by focusing on the need for group cohesion and loyalty, while they signified their approval by spotlighting the need for autonomy. Our findings suggest that children’s intergroup attitudes are influenced by how the behavior of their peers matches different levels of group norms.

Expectations About Ethnic Peer Group Inclusivity: The Role of Shared Interests, Group Norms, and Stereotypes

This study investigated three factors that contribute to social exclusion: group norms, individual characteristics, and stereotypes. Non-Arab American 12- and 16-year-olds (N = 199) judged their expectations about the inclusivity of Arab American and non-Arab American peer groups toward new peers characterized by: (a) different ethnic identity but similar interests (e.g., hobbies) and (b) same ethnic identity but different interests. Participants expected that when groups had exclusive norms, Arab American peers would base inclusion decisions on ethnic identity, but that their own non-Arab group would base decisions on shared interests. Participants who reported stereotypes expected their in-group to be ethnically less inclusive. With age, ethnic-based exclusion increased. The findings are discussed in light of current research on developmental intergroup relationships.

The development of stereotyping and exclusion

This article reviews the developmental science literature on stereotyping and exclusion, with a focus on gender, race, and ethnicity. Stereotyping of others, which is defined as the attribution of traits to individuals based on group membership, is often used to justify exclusion of others in social group contexts. This review includes a focus on the links between these two constructs. Research on stereotyping and exclusion has drawn on several theoretical traditions, including social domain theory, social identity developmental theory, and subjective group dynamics theory, which are also discussed in the context of the research findings. Key findings on stereotyping include categorization and classification in relationship with decreased in-group bias, and the role of stereotypes in encoding information. Findings on exclusion include the use of available information to make judgments, preferences for in-group members who are normative and out-group members who are deviant, the increased importance, with age, of group functioning in exclusion decisions, and decreased negative evaluation of in-group members who partake in exclusionary behaviors. Though little research has explicitly studied the links between stereotyping and exclusion from groups, this review describes the current literature in both areas and suggests future directions for research. Copyright

What works to address prejudice? Look to developmental science research for the answer.

Developmental perspectives on prejudice provide a fundamental and important key to the puzzle for determining how to address prejudice. Research with historically disadvantaged and advantaged groups in childhood and adolescence reveals the complexity of social cognitive and moral judgments about prejudice, discrimination, bias, and exclusion. Children are aware of status and hierarchies, and often reject the status quo. Intervention, to be effective, must happen early in development, before prejudice and stereotypes are deeply entrenched.

Improving Girls’ Sense of Fit in Science: Increasing the Impact of Role Models

A field experiment tested the effect of choosing a “favorite” role model on sense of fit in science among middle school girls. The girls participated in a 1-day science outreach event where they were exposed to multiple female role models. At the end of the event, participants were randomly assigned to choose and write about a favorite role model or to choose and write about their best friend. Girls in the role model choice condition experienced a significant increase in sense of fit in science, whereas girls in the control condition did not. Girls in the role model choice condition also tended to have stronger role model identification than girls in the control condition, and role model identification was correlated with sense of fit in science. Encouraging girls to actively choose and write about a favorite role model may help to maximize the impact of exposure to role models.

The Behavioral and Emotional Screening System Student Form: Is There Evidence of a Global At-Risk Factor in a Sample of Predominantly African American Youth?

School-based universal screening for behavioral and emotional risk can serve as a foundation for effective multi-tiered service delivery systems. The current study examines the measurement and structure of one such universal screener, the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System Student Form (BESS SF). Four models were investigated including a unidimensional model, a multidimensional model, a second-order model, and a bifactor model. This study is the first to use a bifactor model in examining the structure of the BESS SF, and further adds to the literature by using bifactor modeling with a predominantly low-income, urban, African American sample. Results indicate that the bifactor model provided the best fit. Practically, results support interpretation of the global risk score as well as the domain-specific factors.

Minority and Majority Children’s Evaluations of Social Exclusion in Intergroup Contexts

Social exclusion based on race and ethnicity occurs within the context of peer relationships beginning in childhood. Surprisingly little is known about the minority youth perspective regarding experiences and evaluations of social exclusion. While it is important to investigate and identify how majority youth’s biases contribute to social exclusion of ethnic minority individuals, a full understanding of the factors that contribute to social exclusion necessitates examining both the minority and majority perspectives. In this chapter we highlight recent research which has revealed areas of convergence and divergence regarding peer-based social exclusion. Overall, most children and adolescents view social exclusion based on group membership such as race and ethnicity as wrong. Differences emerge between majority and minority perspectives, however, regarding the expression of outgroup attitudes, ingroup bias, and the factors that contribute to social inclusion and exclusion. We review existing research and discuss implications for interventions, such as how to promote positive intergroup contact, social identity development to foster positive peer relationships, and healthy development for minority and majority youth.