儿童对直接和间接偏见的评价证明了同种族包容的合理性

IF 2 2区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Journal of Experimental Child Psychology Pub Date : 2025-03-22 DOI:10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106221
Kate V. Luken Raz, Marley B. Forbes, Melanie Killen
{"title":"儿童对直接和间接偏见的评价证明了同种族包容的合理性","authors":"Kate V. Luken Raz,&nbsp;Marley B. Forbes,&nbsp;Melanie Killen","doi":"10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Different forms of prejudice emerge in childhood, often referred to as direct and indirect bias. Little is known about children’s evaluations of whether certain forms of bias are more okay than others, particularly in the context of peer and parental messages about interracial social inclusion. To address this gap, the current study investigated how Black and White American children aged 6 to 12 years (<em>N</em> = 219; <em>M</em><sub>age</sub> = 9.18 years, <em>SD</em> = 1.90; 51% female) evaluate vignettes in which a Black or White peer opted to include a same-race peer due to indirect bias (preferences for in-group similarity) or direct bias (expressions of out-group dislike). Data were collected in 2021 and 2022. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to expressions of out-group dislike more negatively than same-race inclusion due to in-group similarity preference. They also evaluated same-race inclusion due to a preference for in-group similarity stated by peers more negatively than when stated by parents. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference more positively when the child who included a same-race peer was Black than when the child who included a same-race peer was White. Participants who negatively evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference were more likely to use moral reasoning to justify their evaluations, whereas participants who positively evaluated this inclusion were more likely to use non-moral reasoning. This study revealed novel insights about how Black and White American children evaluate forms of direct and indirect bias as justifications for same-race inclusion and how their reasoning relates to their evaluations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48391,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","volume":"255 ","pages":"Article 106221"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Children’s evaluations of direct and indirect bias justifications for same-race inclusion\",\"authors\":\"Kate V. Luken Raz,&nbsp;Marley B. Forbes,&nbsp;Melanie Killen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Different forms of prejudice emerge in childhood, often referred to as direct and indirect bias. Little is known about children’s evaluations of whether certain forms of bias are more okay than others, particularly in the context of peer and parental messages about interracial social inclusion. To address this gap, the current study investigated how Black and White American children aged 6 to 12 years (<em>N</em> = 219; <em>M</em><sub>age</sub> = 9.18 years, <em>SD</em> = 1.90; 51% female) evaluate vignettes in which a Black or White peer opted to include a same-race peer due to indirect bias (preferences for in-group similarity) or direct bias (expressions of out-group dislike). Data were collected in 2021 and 2022. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to expressions of out-group dislike more negatively than same-race inclusion due to in-group similarity preference. They also evaluated same-race inclusion due to a preference for in-group similarity stated by peers more negatively than when stated by parents. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference more positively when the child who included a same-race peer was Black than when the child who included a same-race peer was White. Participants who negatively evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference were more likely to use moral reasoning to justify their evaluations, whereas participants who positively evaluated this inclusion were more likely to use non-moral reasoning. This study revealed novel insights about how Black and White American children evaluate forms of direct and indirect bias as justifications for same-race inclusion and how their reasoning relates to their evaluations.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology\",\"volume\":\"255 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106221\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002209652500027X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002209652500027X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

不同形式的偏见出现在儿童时期,通常被称为直接偏见和间接偏见。关于儿童对某些形式的偏见是否比其他形式的偏见更可以接受的评价,特别是在同伴和父母关于跨种族社会包容的信息的背景下,我们知之甚少。为了解决这一差距,目前的研究调查了6至12岁的美国黑人和白人儿童(N = 219;年龄= 9.18岁,SD = 1.90;(51%女性)评估黑人或白人同伴由于间接偏见(群体内相似性偏好)或直接偏见(群体外厌恶的表达)而选择包括同种族同伴的小插曲。数据收集于2021年和2022年。由于群体外厌恶的表达,儿童对同种族包容的评价比由于群体内相似偏好的表达,儿童对同种族包容的评价更为负面。他们还对同族包容进行了评估,因为同龄人所陈述的对群体内相似性的偏好比父母所陈述的更为负面。当孩子的同伴是黑人时,孩子对父母偏好的同种族包容的评价要比孩子的同伴是白人时更积极。由于父母偏好而对同种族包容持负面评价的参与者更有可能使用道德推理来证明他们的评价,而对这种包容持积极评价的参与者更有可能使用非道德推理。这项研究揭示了关于美国黑人和白人儿童如何将直接和间接偏见的形式作为同种族包容的理由,以及他们的推理如何与他们的评估相关联的新见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Children’s evaluations of direct and indirect bias justifications for same-race inclusion
Different forms of prejudice emerge in childhood, often referred to as direct and indirect bias. Little is known about children’s evaluations of whether certain forms of bias are more okay than others, particularly in the context of peer and parental messages about interracial social inclusion. To address this gap, the current study investigated how Black and White American children aged 6 to 12 years (N = 219; Mage = 9.18 years, SD = 1.90; 51% female) evaluate vignettes in which a Black or White peer opted to include a same-race peer due to indirect bias (preferences for in-group similarity) or direct bias (expressions of out-group dislike). Data were collected in 2021 and 2022. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to expressions of out-group dislike more negatively than same-race inclusion due to in-group similarity preference. They also evaluated same-race inclusion due to a preference for in-group similarity stated by peers more negatively than when stated by parents. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference more positively when the child who included a same-race peer was Black than when the child who included a same-race peer was White. Participants who negatively evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference were more likely to use moral reasoning to justify their evaluations, whereas participants who positively evaluated this inclusion were more likely to use non-moral reasoning. This study revealed novel insights about how Black and White American children evaluate forms of direct and indirect bias as justifications for same-race inclusion and how their reasoning relates to their evaluations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Child Psychology is an excellent source of information concerning all aspects of the development of children. It includes empirical psychological research on cognitive, social/emotional, and physical development. In addition, the journal periodically publishes Special Topic issues.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board The effect of acute stress on executive function in children: Moderation by parasympathetic nervous system activity The role of social comparison and emotion in children’s fairness judgments Asymmetry of temporal causal reasoning in preschoolers: The role of temporal direction representation Good person, but bad friend: Children’s developing evaluations of tattling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1