The effects of unfairness on children’s cognition

• In Event: 2-087 - Social influences and consequences of unfairness: Emotion, cognition, and culture

Integrative Statement

Research on relative deprivation suggests that one’s relative, as opposed to absolute, wealth and standing affects one’s motivation, well-being and health outcomes (Smith & Huo, 2014). These effects can be negative, such as increased mental health problems, or positive, such as increased motivation to change. Little is known about how unfair inequality affects children’s cognition, but recent experiments have found negative emotional reactions (LoBue et al., 2011) and delayed decisions when children receive less than a peer (Blake & McAuliffe, 2011). Some of these negative effects also occur for older children who receive an advantage.
In this study, we tested the effects of both relative disadvantage (RD) and relative advantage (RA) on children’s executive function. We tested 6-9-year olds recruited from a family database in a university lab (N=82, M=7.3 years). Children were introduced to a machine that appeared to randomly dispense candy to the participant and an absent peer over ten trials. The machine was pre-loaded to create three conditions (randomly assigned): RA (N=29), RD (N=25), or equality (EQ, N=28). All children received the same amount of candy and only the amount for the peer varied. Comprehension checks ensured that children attended to the quantities of candy. Before and after the condition manipulation, children completed a happy/sad Stroop task and a set of Raven’s Matrices and were asked about their mood using a smiley scale. After the post-test, children were asked if they agreed with the statement “this machine is fair.”

To assess whether the condition manipulation created the expected experiences, we conducted a repeated measures ANOVA on Mood (Pre, Post) x Condition with Age (years) as a covariate. Results showed an interaction of Mood x Condition (F(2, 73) = 6.57, p = .002). Children were happier after the RA condition (p = .011), less happy after the RD condition (p = .02), and the same after the EQ condition. In addition, children rated the machine as less fair in the RA (p=.003) and RD (p=.001) compared to the Equal condition, but RA and RD were not significantly different (Figure 1).

Separate repeated measures ANOVAs were run for the Stroop and Raven’s tasks with Condition as a main effect and interaction and Age as a covariate. For the Stroop task, a main effect of Age emerged (F(1,73) = 4.64, p = .034) but no Condition effect. For the Raven’s task, there was a main effect of Age (F(1,78) = 10.44, p = .002) and an interaction of Pre-Post x Condition (F(2,78) = 3.11, p = .05). Simple effects tests showed that children’s performance improved in the RD condition and declined in the EQ condition with no change in the RA condition (Figure 2).

Although data collection is ongoing, these results suggest children’s fluid intelligence scores improved after experiencing a relative disadvantage, despite feeling less happy and recognizing that the machine was not fair. However, this effect may only occur for a relatively high SES sample as tested here.


Authors

• Teresa Harvey, Boston University
  Presenting Author

• Peter R Blake, Boston University
  Non-Presenting Author