The Power of Allies: Infants’ Expectations of Social Obligations During Intergroup Conflict

• In Event: Poster Session 08
  In Poster Session: PS 08 Topic - Social Cognition

Abstract

Forming social allegiances can enhance one’s survival, as individuals may unite and defend each other against rival groups. Although infants track social groups (eg. Powell & Spelke, 2013), it is unclear whether infants expect groups to act as social allegiances during a conflict, thereby expecting ingroup members to come each other’s aid (even if it requires engaging in outgroup harm).
Three studies addressed infants’ reasoning about within and between group helping (and harm) during an episode of intergroup conflict. Studies 1 and 2 investigated whether infants (17-19 mos, and 9-13 mos respectively) expect a member of a social group to indirectly help an ingroup member complete their goal. Infants were introduced to two groups (equal in physical size and number). One agent from each group faced a zero-sum conflict, and neither agent could complete their goal of crossing the platform. Infants looked significantly longer when an ingroup member indirectly helped an outgroup member (by pushing their own group member off the platform) (Study 1, M = 15.97 s; Study 2, M= 13.21s), compared to when an ingroup member indirectly helped their own member complete their goal (by pushing the outgroup member off the platform) (Study 1 M= 12.24 s, t(35) = 2.34 , p = .025, d = 0.45; Study 2 M = 10.84, t(59) = 2.11, p = 0.039, d = 0.31). This suggests that infants a) expect a member of their ingroup to intervene during a conflict, and b) outgroup harm is tolerated during a conflict.
In Study 3, we addressed the possibility that infants’ looking times in Studies 1 and 2 was driven by infants’ surprise due to an instance of ingroup harm (ie. pushing), rather than witnessing an ingroup member helping an outgroup member complete their goal. Therefore, in Study 3, the intervening agent used the same pushing action that served to hinder an agents’ goal in Study 1 and 2, to help an agent accomplish their goal. Consistent with the results of Studies 1 and 2, infants (9-20 mos, N = 88) looked significantly longer when an ingroup member directly helped an outgroup member accomplish their goal (by pushing the outgroup member across the platform) (M = 11.60 s), compared to when an ingroup member directly helped an ingroup member (by pushing their own group member across the platform) (M = 9.18, t(87) = 3.92, p <.001, d = 0.36). This suggests that infants did not view the pushing action as inherently harmful, and were sensitive to whether the intervening agent assisted an ingroup member over an outgroup member during a conflict.
Together, these studies reveal that humans’ understanding of social obligation is evident early in development. More specifically, infants expect individual members of a group to band together to form a social allegiance during a conflict. Consequently, being part of a social group serves to constrain our expectations of individuals’ roles and moral obligations, such that ingroup members are expected to be loyal, even if it requires committing outgroup harm.

Authors

• Anthea Pun, University of British Columbia (UBC)
  Presenting Author

• Susan A J Birch, University of British Columbia (UBC)
  Non-Presenting Author

• Andrew Scott Baron, University of British Columbia (UBC)
  Non-Presenting Author