The relationship between attachment representations and minimal intergroup bias in preschool-aged children.

Attachment theory proposes that young children's experiences with their caregivers has a tremendous influence on how children navigate their social relationships. By the end of early childhood, intergroup contexts play an important role in their social life and children build strong ties to their ingroups. Although both domains relate to the same psychological processes-children's affective ties to others-surprisingly very little research has addressed how children's attachment relates to their intergroup attitudes and behavior. In this study, we investigate the link. For that purpose, 5-year-old children (n = 100) first underwent the German Attachment Story Completion Task (GEV-B). Then we allocated children into minimal groups based on T-Shirt color and assessed their intergroup attitudes and intergroup behavior. Results showed that while most children showed a strong and robust ingroup bias in their attitudes and behavior, children with an insecure-ambivalent attachment representation treated in- and outgroup similarly. Overall, this study provides novel perspectives on the relationship between children's attachment representation and their interactions in the social world. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: This study provides novel insights into the relationship between children's attachment security and the development of intergroup bias in a minimal group context Children with secure, insecure-avoidant and disorganized attachment representation showed a strong intergroup bias in explicit attitudes and behavior Children with insecure-ambivalent attachment representation displayed no intergroup bias Insecure-ambivalent attachment representations might be detrimental to the formation of ingroup attachment.

The developmental trajectories of racial and gender intergroup bias in 5- to 10-year-old children: The impact of general psychological tendencies, contextual factors, and individual propensities.

Racism and intergroup discrimination are pervasive problems in human societies. Whereas several studies have shown that children show bias in the context of many kinds of groups, much less is known about how and when general psychological tendencies and contextual factors contribute to the manifestation of intergroup bias across development, and whether individual differences play a role. In the present study, we pursue these questions by investigating and comparing the developmental trajectories of intergroup bias in 5- to 10-year-old (mostly) White children (n = 100). We assessed children's liking and preferences towards 4 racial groups (White, East Asian, Black, and Middle Eastern) and towards 2 gender groups (male and female) in a within-subject design. We found that the young children in our sample showed a significant racial and gender ingroup bias, speaking to an early and strong manifestation of intergroup bias on the basic ingroup-outgroup distinction. This bias decreased with age. At the same time, we found considerable differences between the different types of outgroups from early on. Furthermore, there were remarkable differences between the developmental trajectories of gender and racial intergroup bias, highlighting the role of both social and contextual influences. Finally, our results did not reveal consistent evidence for the influence of individual differences on children's intergroup bias.

Anticipation of future cooperation eliminates minimal ingroup bias in children and adults.

From early in development, humans show a strong preference for members of their own groups, even in so-called minimal (i.e., arbitrary and unfamiliar) groups, leading to tremendous negative consequences such as outgroup discrimination and derogation. A better understanding of the underlying processes driving humans' group mindedness is an important first step toward fighting discrimination and inequality on a bigger level. Based on the assumption that minimal group allocation elicits the anticipation of future within-group cooperation, which in turn elicits ingroup preference, we investigate whether changing participants' anticipation from within-group cooperation to between-group cooperation reduces their ingroup bias. In the present set of five studies (overall N = 465) we test this claim in two different populations (children and adults), in two different countries (United States and Germany), and in two kinds of groups (minimal and social group based on gender). Results confirm that changing participants' anticipation of who they will cooperate with from ingroup to outgroup members significantly reduces their ingroup bias in minimal groups, though not for gender, a noncoalitional group. In summary, these experiments provide robust evidence for the hypothesis that children and adults encode minimal group membership as a marker for future collaboration. They show that experimentally manipulating this expectation can eliminate their minimal ingroup bias. This study sheds light on the underlying cognitive processes in intergroup behavior throughout development and opens up new avenues for research on reducing ingroup bias and discrimination. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

A question of morals? The role of moral identity in support of the youth climate movement Fridays4Future.

In the past year, an unprecedented climate movement has risen among European youth, so-called "Fridays4Future" (F4F). Thousands of pupils skip school every Friday to protest for better climate politics. The public debate on the protests contains highly mixed reactions, including praise as well as condemnation. Recent theoretical accounts propose that people's engagement in community service and actions towards a greater good could be related to their moral identity. Moral identity (MI) is defined as the extent to which being moral is important to the personal identity. The current preregistered study investigates the link between moral identity and participants' support for F4F in an online survey (N = 537). Results confirm the association between participants' moral identity and their support for F4F, with the internalization scale predicting passive forms of support and the symbolization scale predicting active forms of support. Additionally, risk perception was found to play an important role. Thus, this study confirms the role of moral identity in people's pro-environmental engagement and offers new insights in the context of an important and timely issue.

(Peer) Group influence on children's prosocial and antisocial behavior.

This study investigates the influence of moral ingroup versus outgroup behavior on 5- and 6-year-olds' and 8- and 9-year-olds' own moral behavior (N = 296). After minimal group assignment, children in Experiment 1 observed adult ingroup or outgroup members engaging in prosocial sharing or antisocial stealing before they themselves had the opportunity to privately donate stickers or take away stickers from others. Older children shared more than younger children, and prosocial models elicited higher sharing. Surprisingly, group membership had no effect. Experiment 2 investigated the same question using peer models. Children in the younger age group were significantly influenced by ingroup behavior, whereas older children were not affected by group membership. Additional measures reveal interesting insights into how moral ingroup and outgroup behavior affects intergroup attitudes, evaluations, and choices.

In Defense of the Commons: Young Children Negatively Evaluate and Sanction Free Riders.

Human flourishing depends on individuals paying costs to contribute to the common good, but such arrangements are vulnerable to free riding, in which individuals benefit from others' contributions without paying costs themselves. Systems of tracking and sanctioning free riders can stabilize cooperation, but the origin of such tendencies is not well understood. Here, we provide evidence that children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders. Across six studies, we showed that these tendencies are robust, large in magnitude, tuned to intentional rather than unintentional noncontribution, and generally consistent across third- and first-party cases. Further, these effects cannot be accounted for by factors that frequently co-occur with free riding, such as nonconforming behaviors or the costs that free riding imposes on the group. Our findings demonstrate that from early in life, children both hold and enforce a normative expectation that individuals are intrinsically obligated to contribute to the common good.

The Whistleblower's Dilemma in Young Children: When Loyalty Trumps Other Moral Concerns.

When a group engages in immoral behavior, group members face the whistleblower's dilemma: the conflict between remaining loyal to the group and standing up for other moral concerns. This study examines the developmental origins of this dilemma by investigating 5-year-olds' whistleblowing on their in- vs. outgroup members' moral transgression. Children (n = 96) watched puppets representing their ingroup vs. outgroup members commit either a mild or a severe transgression. After the mild transgression, children tattled on both groups equally often. After the severe transgression, however, they were significantly less likely to blow the whistle on their ingroup than on the outgroup. These results suggest that children have a strong tendency to act on their moral concerns, but can adjust their behavior according to their group's need: When much is at stake for the ingroup (i.e., after a severe moral transgression), children's behavior is more likely to be guided by loyalty.

I won't tell: Young children show loyalty to their group by keeping group secrets.

Group loyalty is highly valued. However, little is known about young children's loyal behavior. This study tested whether 4- and 5-year-olds (N=96) remain loyal to their group even when betraying it would be materially advantageous. Children and four puppets were allocated to novel groups. Two of these puppets (either in-group or out-group members) then told children a group secret and urged them not to disclose the secret. Another puppet (not assigned to either group) then bribed children with stickers to tell the secret. Across ages, children were significantly less likely to reveal the secret in the in-group condition than in the out-group condition. Thus, even young children are willing to pay a cost to be loyal to their group.

Uniquely human self-control begins at school age.

Human beings have remarkable skills of self-control, but the evolutionary origins of these skills are unknown. Here we compare children at 3 and 6 years of age with one of humans' two nearest relatives, chimpanzees, on a battery of reactivity and self-control tasks. Three-year-old children and chimpanzees were very similar in their abilities to resist an impulse for immediate gratification, repeat a previously successful action, attend to a distracting noise, and quit in the face of repeated failure. Six-year-old children were more skillful than either 3-year-olds or chimpanzees at controlling their impulses. These results suggest that humans' most fundamental skills of self-control - as part of the overall decision-making process - are a part of their general great ape heritage, and that their species-unique skills of self-control begin at around the age at which many children begin formal schooling.

Stick with your group: young children's attitudes about group loyalty.

For adults, loyalty to the group is highly valued, yet little is known about how children evaluate loyalty. We investigated children's attitudes about loyalty in a third-party context. In the first experiment, 4- and 5-year-olds watched a video of two groups competing. Two members of the losing group then spoke. The disloyal individual said she wanted to win and therefore would join the other group. The loyal individual said she also wanted to win but would stay with her group. Children were then asked five forced-choice questions about these two individuals' niceness, trustworthiness, morality, and deservingness of a reward. The 5-year-olds preferred the loyal person across all questions; results for the 4-year-olds were considerably weaker but in the same direction. The second experiment investigated the direction of the effect in 5-year-olds. In this experiment, children answered questions about either a loyal individual, a disloyal individual, or a neutral individual. Children rated both the loyal and neutral individuals more positively than the disloyal individual across a number of measures. Thus, whereas disloyal behavior is evaluated unfavorably by children, loyal behavior is the expected norm. These results suggest that, at least from 5 years of age, children understand that belonging to a group entails certain commitments. This marks an important step in their own ability to negotiate belonging and become trustworthy and reliable members of their social groups.