Poster #81 - Children’s Intergroup Compromise Expectations and Decisions

• In Event: Poster Session 12

Abstract

In intergroup contexts, groups of individuals have many options for working together. When two groups are in a disagreement, one common option is to compromise: to reach an agreement involving both sides giving concessions. Little is known about children’s understanding of compromises and their evaluations of different compromise options. We introduced children to a competitive, intergroup context where two groups of children needed to decide what to do. In this scenario, children evaluated the acceptability of three compromises: favoring the ingroup, favoring the outgroup, and a neutral compromise. They were also given two options to not compromise—ingroup only: doing only what the ingroup wants; and outgroup only: doing only what the outgroup wants. All were evaluated on a 6-point Likert-type scale. Children (N = 48, 8-12 years old, Mage = 10.31 years, 27 females, data collection ongoing) rated each of the five options and then answered two questions on preference (Which option do you/the outgroup prefer?) and two questions on compromise (Which option will you/the outgroup offer?).
A 2 (age: 8-10 years old, 11-12 years old) by 5 (compromises: ingroup only, favors ingroup, neutral, favors outgroup, outgroup only) ANOVA with repeated measures on the last factor revealed a significant main effect of compromise options (F(4, 184) = 14.062, p < .001) and age (F(1, 46) = 4.819, p = .033). Children rated the ingroup only option (M = 4.08, SE = 0.22;) and the neutral compromise (M = 3.99, SE = 0.23) as better than a compromise that favored the ingroup (M = 3.24, SE = 0.19;), a compromise that favored the outgroup (M = 2.76, SE = 0.20), and only doing what the outgroup wanted (M = 2.56, SE = 0.21; all ps < .03). There was no difference in children’s ratings of the neutral compromise and doing only what the ingroup wants. Older children rated the neutral compromise and the compromise that favored the outgroup as slightly better compared to younger children (ps < .05).
A 2 (age: 8-10 years old, 11-12 years old) by 4 (ingroup preference, ingroup offer, outgroup preference, outgroup offer) ANOVA with repeated measures on the last factor revealed a significant main effect of compromise actions (F(3, 135) = 74.080, p < .001). Children thought their group preferred the ingroup only non-compromise but would offer the compromise favoring the ingroup, and that the outgroup preferred the compromise favoring the outgroup (rather than the outgroup only non-compromise) but would offer a neutral compromise. This shows that children are complexly considering the perspectives of the ingroup and outgroup and applying this to their compromise predictions. Children believe that both the ingroup and outgroup will compromise, but the ingroup will make an offer that favors themselves while the outgroup will offer a more neutral compromise. No age differences were found.
Little is known about children’s understanding and participation in intergroup compromises. The current study shows children’s complex evaluations of various compromises (and decisions not to compromise) as well as their predictions for how others will compromise.

Authors

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

• Jacob Glassman, Boston College

• Emily Berman

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