Older children accept moral reasons against exclusion more readily than younger ones

Evidence

Figure 19.1 suggests that when identity concerns are high, an ingroup peer socializer will be more effective at countering the bully than an outgroup peer, who for reasons of empathy might be more likely to side with the bullied victim. Research with adults highlights the need for behavior that explicitly disagrees with the insults or exclusions and demonstrates a new norm. But motivations for conformity differ by age. The age at which young children identify themselves with their peer group and conform willingly or unwillingly follows an inverted-U curve (Costanzo & Shaw, 1966; Gavin & Furman, 1989). One motivation is to maintain positive peer relations and social evaluation. Older children know that moral reasons against exclusion and bullying are preferable to social convention and conformity (Killen, Lee- Kim, McGlothlin, & Stangor, 2002), so the former might successfully be used to counter norms of prejudice. However, conformity to another’s attitude also occurs among younger children, possibly with a different motivation (Aboud, 1981). Because of developmental constraints on the ability to take more than one perspective, young children are often not aware that an alternative is possible or better. They may also not see the difference between a rule that derives from social convention as opposed to moral considerations. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 2020

Categorization

• XREF: The inverted-U conformity curve and children’s inability to see alternatives connects to developmental-psychology findings about egocentrism and theory of mind in Piaget and Gopnik.
• QUESTION: What exact ages mark the inverted-U peak for peer-group identification and conformity? Worth chasing the Costanzo & Shaw data.