Challenging the Exclusion of Immigrant Peers.

The present study examined age-related differences in bystander reactions within the context of peer exclusion of national ingroup (British) and immigrant outgroup (Australian or Turkish) peers. The immigrant peers were from nations that varied in terms of their perceived intergroup status in Britain. Participants were British children (n = 110, 8-11 years) and adolescents (n = 193, 13-16 years) who were presented with one of three scenarios in which either a British national, Australian immigrant or Turkish immigrant peer was excluded by a British peer group. Participants indicated their bystander responses. Perceived similarity and bystander self-efficacy were examined as possible correlates of bystander reactions. Findings revealed that children were more likely to directly challenge the social exclusion when the excluded peer was British or Australian compared to when they were Turkish. In contrast, adolescents did not differentiate in their response - they were equally likely to directly challenge the exclusion regardless of the excluded peer's nationality. Importantly, when the excluded peer was Turkish, moderated mediation analysis showed that, with age, there was higher bystander self-efficacy for challenging the exclusions. In turn, higher bystander self-efficacy was related to higher direct challenging. These novel findings demonstrate the importance of intergroup relations, perceived similarity and bystander self-efficacy in the emergence of age-related differences in bystander reactions to the exclusion of immigrant peers [219 words].

When do bystanders get help from teachers or friends? Age and group membership matter when indirectly challenging social exclusion.

We examined developmental changes in British children's (8- to 10-year-olds) and adolescents' (13- to 15-year-olds, N = 340; Female N = 171, 50.3%) indirect bystander reactions (i.e., judgments about whether to get help and from whom when witnessing social exclusion) and their social-moral reasoning regarding their reactions to social exclusion. We also explored, for the first time, how the group membership of the excluder and victim affect participants' reactions. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they witnessed a peer being excluded from a school club by another peer. We manipulated the group membership of the victim (either British or an immigrant) and the group membership of the excluder (either British or an immigrant). Participants' likelihood of indirect bystander reactions decreased from childhood into adolescence. Children were more likely to get help from a teacher or an adult than getting help from a friend, whereas adolescents were more likely to get help from a friend than getting help from a teacher or an adult. For both indirect bystander reactions, children justified their likelihood of responding by referring to their trust in their teachers and friends. Adolescents were more likely to refer to group loyalty and dynamics, and psychological reasons. The findings support and extend the Social Reasoning Developmental (SRD) approach by showing the importance of group processes with age in shaping children's judgments about how to respond indirectly by asking for help from others, when they are bystanders in a situation that involves exclusion. The findings have practical implications for combating social exclusion and promoting prosocial bystander behavior in schools.

British Adolescents Are More Likely Than Children to Support Bystanders Who Challenge Exclusion of Immigrant Peers.

The present study examined British children's and adolescents' individual and perceived group evaluations of a challenger when a member of one's own group excludes a British national or an immigrant newcomer to the school (Turkish or Australian) from participating in a group activity. Participants included British children (n = 110, Mage in years = 9.69, SD = 1.07, 44 girls, aged 8-11) and adolescents (n = 193, Mage in years = 14.16, SD = 0.92, 104 girls, aged 13-16), who were inducted into their group and heard hypothetical scenarios in which a member of their own group expressed a desire to exclude the newcomer from joining their activity. Subsequently, participants heard that another member of the ingroup challenged the exclusionary act by stating that they should be inclusive. Children's and adolescents' individual evaluations of the bystander who challenged the social exclusion of an immigrant peer were more positive than their perceived group evaluations, recognizing that groups are often exclusionary. Only adolescents but not children differed in their individual and perceived group evaluations in the social exclusion of British peers. When the newcomer was an immigrant peer, adolescents were more likely to evaluate the challenger positively in both their individual and perceived group evaluations compared to children. Further, children, compared to adolescents, were more likely to reason about social and group norms to justify their evaluations only when the excluded peer was an immigrant but not when the excluded peer was British. Adolescents were more likely to reason about fairness, rights, and equality. The findings indicate that exclusionary group norms surrounding immigrants begin in childhood. Interventions that focus on changing group norms to be more inclusive could be effective in reducing prejudicial attitudes toward immigrants in childhood.

Minority- and majority-status bystander reactions to, and reasoning about, intergroup social exclusion.

We examined minority-status (non-Cypriot immigrant) and majority-status (Cypriot national) preadolescents' bystander reactions to, and reasoning about, intergroup social exclusion (N = 367; Mage = 11.7 years; 50% Cypriot). Participants read one of three contexts where victim group identity was either non-Cypriot or Cypriot or a context where identity was not mentioned (i.e., control). Cypriot participants reported higher prosocial bystander responses when Cypriot victims were excluded compared with when non-Cypriot victims were excluded. Non-Cypriot participants reported equally high prosocial bystander responses for Cypriot and non-Cypriot victims, and both were higher than those for the control condition. When choosing to challenge social exclusion, non-Cypriot and Cypriot participants employed moral reasoning, focusing on concerns of welfare and equality. When choosing not to challenge the exclusion, Cypriot bystanders referenced personal choice (e.g., "I would not say anything; it is not my problem") more when victim identity was salient. Non-Cypriot bystanders referenced personal choice only when not challenging exclusion in the control context. Cypriot participants with high levels of intergroup contact reported higher helping intentions toward non-Cypriot victims. These findings support and extend social reasoning developmental theory and highlight practical implications for tackling intergroup social exclusion in schools and maintaining positive intergroup relations.

Developmental differences in bystander behavior toward intergroup and intragroup exclusion.

This study examined prosocial bystander behavior in an online ball-throwing game (Cyberball), toward the exclusion of immigrants and nonimmigrant peers within intergroup and intragroup contexts. Participants were British children (8- to 10-year-olds) and adolescents (13- to 15-year-olds, N = 292; female N = 144). They were an ethnically diverse low-to-middle SES sample from a South Asian, White, Black, or mixed ethnic background. Participants played the game and witnessed a victim being excluded by peers. The victim's and excluders' group membership and status were highlighted in a prototypical (i.e., majority status peers excluding a minority status victim) or nonprototypical (i.e., minority status peers excluding a majority status victim) intergroup context. In intragroup contexts exclusion involved peers from the same group (i.e., majority status peers excluding a majority status victim or minority status peers excluding a minority status victim). Prosocial bystander behavior and "verbal" reactions to the exclusion were measured. Adolescents showed more prosocial bystander behavior than children when it was an intergroup context but not when it was an intragroup context. Only adolescents showed more prosocial bystander behavior when the intergroup context was prototypical compared to nonprototypical. Verbal reactions were related to prosocial bystander behavior and, with age, individuals increasingly verbally challenged the exclusion and the motivation behind it. The findings support the Social Reasoning Developmental (SRD) approach to social exclusion by showing that from late childhood into midadolescence bystander behavior is increasingly related to group membership and group status of the excluders and victim. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Race-Based Humor and Peer Group Dynamics in Adolescence: Bystander Intervention and Social Exclusion.

Adolescents' evaluations of discriminatory race-based humor and their expectations about peer responses to discrimination were investigated in 8th- (Mage  = 13.80) and 10th-grade (Mage  = 16.11) primarily European-American participants (N = 256). Older adolescents judged race-based humor as more acceptable than did younger adolescents and were less likely to expect peer intervention. Participants who rejected discrimination were more likely to reference welfare/rights and prejudice and to anticipate that peers would intervene. Showing awareness of group processes, adolescents who rejected race-based humor believed that peers who intervened would be more likely to be excluded. They also disapproved of exclusion more than did participants who supported race-based humor. Results expose the complexity of situations involving subtle discrimination. Implications for bullying interventions are discussed.

The development of bystander intentions and social-moral reasoning about intergroup verbal aggression.

A developmental intergroup approach was taken to examine the development of prosocial bystander intentions among children and adolescents. Participants as bystanders (N = 260) aged 8-10 and 13-15 years were presented with scenarios of direct aggression between individuals from different social groups (i.e., intergroup verbal aggression). These situations involved either an ingroup aggressor and an outgroup victim or an outgroup aggressor and an ingroup victim. This study focussed on the role of intergroup factors (group membership, ingroup identification, group norms, and social-moral reasoning) in the development of prosocial bystander intentions. Findings showed that prosocial bystander intentions declined with age. This effect was partially mediated by the ingroup norm to intervene and perceived severity of the verbal aggression. However, a moderated mediation analysis showed that only when the victim was an ingroup member and the aggressor an outgroup member did participants become more likely with age to report prosocial bystander intentions due to increased ingroup identification. Results also showed that younger children focussed on moral concerns and adolescents focussed more on psychological concerns when reasoning about their bystander intention. These novel findings help explain the developmental decline in prosocial bystander intentions from middle childhood into early adolescence when observing direct intergroup aggression.

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.

The role of cognitive abilities in children's inferences about social atypicality and peer exclusion and inclusion in intergroup contexts.

Children aged 6-7 years judged a loyal and a partially disloyal member of a school in terms of how typical they are within the school group and their likely acceptance by peers from the same school and a different school. Second-order mental-state understanding (SOMSU) predicted whether children thought atypical members would be included differently in the two groups. Counterfactual reasoning ability, multiple classification ability, and working memory ability did not predict children's judgements of group members. Moreover, as predicted by the developmental subjective group dynamics model, only children with higher levels of SOMSU and who discerned differences in the typicality of normative and deviant ingroup members inferred that peers would differently include atypical individuals from the same and different groups.

Evaluations of and reasoning about normative and deviant ingroup and outgroup members: development of the black sheep effect.

Research with adults has demonstrated a "black sheep effect" (BSE) whereby, relative to evaluations of normative group members, ingroup deviants are derogated more than outgroup deviants. The developmental subjective group dynamics (DSGD) model holds that the BSE should develop during middle childhood when children apply wider social norms. Three hundred and thirty-eight children who were between 5 and 12 years old judged a normative (socially desirable) and a deviant (socially undesirable) member from an ingroup or an outgroup school. Results confirmed a developmental increase in the BSE, the first time this has been demonstrated. Children's own evaluations of group members were mediated by their expectations about ingroup peers' evaluations. In line with DSGD and social domain theories, with age, children's explanations of peer evaluations for ingroup deviance focused relatively more on loyalty. Practical and theoretical implications for peer inclusion and exclusion are discussed.