Adults’ Assessments of Social Learning: Examining Variation in WEIRD Expectations for Conformity and Intelligence

• In Event: Observing, Conforming, and Internalizing: How Does Social Learning Occur Across Different Contexts and Cultures?

Abstract

Children learn the beliefs and practices of their communities by observing and imitating others (Legare & Nielsen, 2015). This would not be possible without an early developing conformity bias (Corriveau et al., 2009). To what extent is children’s conformity encouraged within a culture that values independence and creativity? Between- and within-population comparisons provide critical insight into the extent and cause of cultural variation. Previous research found variation in whether children, adolescents, and adults use behavioral conformity as an indication of children’s intelligence across cultures (Clegg et al., 2017; Wen et al., 2019). Although US adults favor self-confidence and independence in thinking over obedience and conformity (Paguio et al.1987) compared to other populations, there is some evidence to suggest variability within the US in associations between conformity and intelligence (Clegg et al., 2017).

Across two studies, our objective was to examine whether beliefs about child socialization goals influences the association between endorsements for children’s conformity and intelligence within- and between-WEIRD populations. In Study 1, we examined whether US adults (N = 1,246) attend to children’s behavioral conformity when making trait-based judgments and examined potential predictors of these judgments. We hypothesized valuing individualism and assertiveness would be less and interdependence would be more strongly associated with endorsing high conformity as intelligent. Participants watched videos of children displaying high/low conformity behavior and were asked which child displayed two target traits–intelligence and good behavior to assess whether participants attend to children’s behavioral conformity when making evaluations about desirable traits.

A mixed-effects binary logistic regression was performed to test the effects of socialization goals on participants’ likelihood of endorsing the high conformity child as intelligent or well-behaved. Those who valued independence more (OR = 1.21, p = .005, Figure 1a) and interdependence less (OR = 0.79, p = .002, Figure 1b) were less likely to endorse conformity as intelligent compared to good behavior. Participants who valued assertiveness more were less likely to endorse conformity overall (OR = 0.92, p = .016, Figure 1c).

After establishing within-culture variation in the relationship between socialization goals, conformity, and desirable traits, we examined whether this same pattern emerges in other WEIRD, English-speaking countries that share similar cultural histories, but may hold different conformity values (e.g., high in Australia, see Peeters, 2004). In Study 2, we examined 1,295 participants in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK, and US, using the same paradigm as Study 1. We found an effect of country on the likelihood of endorsing the high conformity child as intelligent compared to good behavior (see Figure 2).

These studies demonstrate that beliefs about socialization influence adults’ perceptions of the relationship between intelligence and conformity. Building upon previous research that found SES effects within the US in associations between conformity and intelligence (Clegg et al., 2017), this work adds critical nuance to explain individual differences in beliefs about conformity. This work contributes additional information about other WEIRD countries and highlights the importance for conducting both within- and between-population comparisons in examining continuity and variability in childrearing beliefs and practices.

Authors

• Nicole Wen, Brunel University London
  Presenting Author

• Jennifer Marie Clegg, Texas State University

• Stephanie Estrera, The University of Texas at Austin

• Ajna F. Kertesz, University of Texas at Austin

• Frankie T. K. Fong, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology

• ALEJANDRO ERUT, University of Texas at Austin

• Mark Gregory Nielsen, University of Queensland

• Cristine H. Legare, University of Texas at Austin