Diversity vs. ingroup: How children generalize for the common good

Abstract

How do children generalize for the common good? The present study investigated whether children are more likely to use the preference of their ingroup (ingroup rationale) or that of a diverse group (diversity rationale) as a basis for generalization about the broader community. In a series of studies, five-year-olds from two different cultures (US and China), yet living in environments with analogous ingroup majority-outgroup minority structure, were asked to generalize either the preference of a diverse sample or the preference of an ingroup sample to the majority. We found that children from both cultures have a default strategy to generalize from their ingroup (Study 1). However, Studies 2–4 show that this ingroup default is amenable to change, suggesting that children mostly use this strategy because ingroup members were salient and conveniently available. When ingroup was removed or reduced (Study 2), or when primed with photos of diverse populations (Studies 3 & 4), children changed their strategies and were more likely to use the diversity-rationale. In both cultures, the intergroup structure of children's living environment exerts similar pressures, resulting in analogous outcomes in generalizing for the common good.

Keywords

• Ingroup bias
• Diversity-based reasoning
• Inductive reasoning
• Intergroup relations