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].

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.