Morally-Relevant Theory of Mind and Being Disadvantaged Contribute to Rejecting Gender Inequality

• In Event: Poster Session 13
  In Poster Session: PS 13 Topic - Moral Development

Abstract

Research on children’s evaluations of inequalities has shown that children both dislike unfair treatment but also display biases that contribute to inequality. For example, children often give fewer resources to those perceived to be the “outgroup,” even when they are disadvantaged. While both social cognitive and experiential processes have been proposed to contribute to children’s responses to inequality, very little empirical research has directly tested this proposition. The current study investigated the role of children’s actual experiences being treated unfairly based on gender and their theory of mind competence embedded in a morally-relevant situation (MoToM) on their evaluations of gender inequality.
Participants (N=142), ages 4-10 years old, evenly divided by gender, were assigned to gender matched groups and participated in a puzzle competition between teams of boys and girls. During the puzzle competition, a peer allocator explicitly stated that s/he gave out more prizes to the team that was their same gender (and not based on performance). Children were then asked two MoToM questions: whether new characters (a girl and a boy) who had never met the allocator would think that the allocator would distribute the prizes based on performance or gender. The questions received a score of either 0 (allocator will distribute based on gender) or 1 (allocator will distribute based on performance), resulting in final MoToM scores of 0, 1, or 2. Additionally, children were asked to evaluate the gender-based inequality (i.e., gender-biased prize allocation) on a six point Likert-type scale (1=really not OK, 6=really OK).
A 2 (Status: Disadvantaged, Advantaged) X 3 (MoToM: 0, 1, 2) ANOVA was conducted with children’s judgment of the inequality as the dependent variable. There was a main effect of status on children’s inequality judgments (F(1, 136)=10.342, p=.002). Children who were previously disadvantaged by their gender rated a gender-based inequality as less acceptable (M=2.13, SD=0.21) than children who were previously advantaged by their gender (M=3.11, SD=0.22). A main effect for MoToM was also found (F(2, 136)=8.133, p<.001). Children who answered both MoToM questions incorrectly rated the inequality as more acceptable (M=3.35, SD=0.24) than children who answered one MoToM question correctly (M=2.51, SD=0.31; p=.035) and children who answered both MoToM questions correctly (M=2.02, SD=0.23; p<.001). There was no significant difference for rating the inequality for children who passed one and two MoToM questions. A Status X MoToM interaction was found (F(2, 136)=3.232, p=.043). Children who failed both MoToM questions and were previously advantaged by gender bias rated the inequality significantly better (M=4.35, SD=0.35) than children who failed both MoToM questions but were previously disadvantaged by gender bias (M=2.35, SD=0.32; p<.001), see Figure 1. Overall, both children’s own experience being advantaged or disadvantaged based on their gender and their morally-relevant ToM were significantly related to their evaluations of gender inequality. Experiencing disadvantaged treatment appears to enable children to reject inequality based on gender, and more so than children who experience advantaged treatment. These novel findings shed light on the social-cognitive and experiential processes that contribute to understanding social inequality.

Authors

• Jacquelyn Glidden, University of Maryland - College Park
  Presenting Author

• Kathryn M. Yee, University of Maryland - College Park
  Non-Presenting Author

• Melanie A. Killen, University of Maryland - College Park
  Non-Presenting Author