Poster #66 - “Black people play with black people”: Preschooler’s Justifications of Inclusion and Exclusion by Social Group

• In Event: 3-159 - Poster Session 12
  In Poster Session: PS 12 Section - Diversity, Equity & Social Justice

Integrative Statement

Research shows that children, in general, do not condone social exclusion, particularly when it is based on race and/or gender (Killen & Stangor, 2001; Killen & Rutland, 2011). However, research has largely focused on exclusionary decisions and interviewed older children. Since gender and racial awareness begins around age 3 (Aboud, 1988) research is needed to understand how children choose playmates (i.e., inclusionary decisions) and if children are using race and gender to make decisions about other children.
58 preschoolers from the Toledo area were interviewed (32 White, 26 Non-White, Mage= 4.7 years). Children saw 4 drawings: White Boy, Black Boy, White Girl, and Black Girl. They were told, “Peggy/Bobby (matching participant gender) looks like you and is your age. She/He is trying to decide who to play with. Which of these kids do you think Peggy/Bobby most wants to play with? Why?” The children were also asked who Peggy/Bobby second most wanted to play with and why, because it was predicted that most children would pick the in-group as the initial selection. Then, they were asked, “Is there anyone Peggy/Bobby does not want to play with, or does she/he want to play with everyone?”
Chi-square analyses were conducted to investigate the relationship between participant race and gender and their selection’s race and gender (Table 1). In general, children made inclusion decisions based on gender. For the first playmate selection, all groups were more likely to select a child similar to them except Non-White girls, who were more likely to select the White girl. Interestingly, Non-White boys and girls were significantly more likely to make gender-based decisions than White children. Half of the children did not choose a picture to be rejected (n = 29), though those who did usually did so based on gender. Notably, there were several trending interactions of participant and selection social group (race and gender combined). These findings highlight the importance of considering both participant and target social identity as well as intersectionality.
Additionally, children’s justifications for their choices were coded. Qualitative coding revealed multiple themes (see Figure 1). The most common themes were Social-Emotional (26.23%; e.g. “She is sad”, “He is the best friend”, and “He is angry (rejection)”) and Categorical (25.44%; e.g. “Their skin is the same” and “She doesn’t play with boys (rejection)”). The categorical theme included any decisions made based on race or gender (race: 11.40%, gender: 14.04%). Other common themes included behaviors (e.g. “They play Hockey”), personality (e.g. “He’s nice”, “She’s mean (rejection)”), and No reason (e.g. “I don’t know”, “I just wanted to”).
These findings indicate that children do make decisions based on race and gender, and are somewhat aware of the motivation behind making social group based choices. However, they also provided a variety of other reasons for their choices. While few children rejected a child, their inclusion decisions did show some gender- and race-based patterns. Findings have implications for parents, educators, and policy makers who want to encourage children to play with diverse friend groups.

Authors

• Cjersti Jayne Jensen, Bowling Green State University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Io Tejada-Salgado, Bowling Green State University
  Presenting Author

• Freyja Hofler, Bowling Green State University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Danah-Madison Reda, Bowling Green State University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Marie S. Tisak, Bowling Green State University
  Non-Presenting Author