Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Panel
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic Area
Search Tips
Virtual Exhibit Hall
Personal Schedule
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Research on how adolescents think about wealth status provides insights into the origins of social inequalities, and whether adolescents view such inequalities as wrong or legitimate. To date, little empirical inquiry has been conducted in contexts of strong social hierarchies; thus, it remains an open question how adolescents growing up in hierarchical cultures that impede upward mobility use socioeconomic status (SES) to make attributions about negative or positive intentions of individuals in peer encounters. Moreover, while research has shown that intergroup friendships reduce intergroup biases, little is known about whether adolescents expect intergroup friendships based on SES to be feasible (Leman & Cameron, 2017).
To address these research gaps, we investigated whether adolescents living in a socially hierarchical culture (Nepal) attributed negative intentions to peers based on wealth status, whether they expected friendship to be feasible between a high and low wealth peer dyad, and whether parents of peers from different wealth backgrounds would support cross-group friendships.
Participants were 389 adolescents (53% girls, Mage = 14.13; SDage = 1.34; range = 10 – 18) from a rural area in Nepal with high social inequalities. Gender-matched pictures of intergroup dyads in which intergroup status was reflected by SES were displayed (Figure 1). An ambiguous picture was shown and participants were asked: 1) “What happened here?” 2) “Are the two characters friends? Why/Why Not?” 3) “Do the parents of the high-SES girl/boy want them to be friends?” 4) “Do the parents of the low SES girl/boy want them to be friends?” Responses were coded by a team of trained researcher assistants (interrater reliability, Light’s Kappa κ = .82-95).
The results revealed that participants were significantly more likely to ascribe neutral or positive intentions rather than negative intentions to the low SES character. At the same time, participants did not differentiate their attributions of neutral/positive or negative intentions to the high SES character (Figure 2).
However, despite the positive perceptions of the low SES character, only a minority of adolescents (18%) believed that the two story characters were friends, referencing social hierarchies. Participants’ expectation of parental support for intergroup friendship varied as a function of the target’s SES. While 81% of adolescents thought that the low SES parents would want the two story characters to be friends, only 30% of the adolescents reported that the high SES parents would approve of that friendship (Figure 2). For low SES parents, adolescents mostly referenced reasons of social mobility and other-oriented concern. For high SES parents, adolescents justified negative expectations predominantly with reasons of social hierarchies and reputation.
The novel findings are that Nepalese adolescents were more likely to attribute positive intentions to the low rather than high SES peer in a situation in which intentions were ambiguous. However, adolescents also thought that it was unlikely for the peer dyad to be friends, suggesting that adolescents understand how the restrictive rules of the social system affect social relationships. The findings are discussed with regards to current theories and research about morality, intergroup attitudes, and social hierarchies.
Bonnie Woodward, University of Maryland
Presenting Author
Jeanine Grütter, University of Zurich / University of Maryland
Non-Presenting Author
Iren Karki, Adler University
Non-Presenting Author
Mina Sharma, Tribhuvan University
Non-Presenting Author
Eva Freites, University of Maryland, College Park
Non-Presenting Author
Hiba Ahmed, University of Maryland
Non-Presenting Author
Melanie Killen, University of Maryland
Non-Presenting Author