Theses and Dissertations from UMD
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/2
New submissions to the thesis/dissertation collections are added automatically as they are received from the Graduate School. Currently, the Graduate School deposits all theses and dissertations from a given semester after the official graduation date. This means that there may be up to a 4 month delay in the appearance of a give thesis/dissertation in DRUM
More information is available at Theses and Dissertations at University of Maryland Libraries.
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item Children's Developing Conceptions of Fairness: The Role of Status in Children's Responses to Inequalities(2018) Rizzo, Michael Thomas; Killen, Melanie; Human Development; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)The moral concern for fairness is a core element of social life throughout the lifespan. Concerns about fairness arise in multiple contexts, and one very salient context is the allocation of resources. Understanding the harmful consequences of unfair resource allocations, for example, is essential to ensuring social harmony and protecting the welfare of all individuals. This study investigated how 3- to 8-year-old children (N = 176) perceived of, and responded to, resource inequalities based on their status within the inequality (advantaged or disadvantaged) and whether the allocation was based on differences in individual merit or gender biases. Across a range of assessments, the present study documented how children’s status within individual and gender based inequalities had a profound influence on how they perceived a context of resource inequality. Children’s status and the type of inequality were related to their perceptions of the inequality in several ways. Children who were disadvantaged by an inequality judged it to be more unfair than children who were advantaged by it. However, both advantaged and disadvantaged children judged gender based allocations to be more unfair than individually based inequalities. Further, children who were advantaged by the inequality were more likely to support redistributing the resources when they expected that a fellow – advantaged – ingroup member initiated the redistribution. Finally, children were more likely to rectify a gender based inequality than an individual one, whereas they were more likely to perpetuate an individual inequality than a gender based one. Children’s intra- and intergroup attitudes and inclusion decisions were also related to their status and the type of inequality that they experienced. Although children were more favorable towards gender ingroup than outgroup members, with age, children preferentially included gender outgroup peers that performed well at the activities. Evidence was also found to support the argument that children’s experiences with resource inequalities are related to their conceptions of fairness in subsequent contexts. Children who were personally disadvantaged by an inequality evaluated rectifying a separate, third-person, inequality more favorably and were also more likely to rectify the third-person inequality. Finally, children’s ToM competence was revealed as an important developmental mechanism for children’s developing conceptions of fairness. Children with a more advanced understanding of others’ mental states judged rectifying gender based inequalities more positively and were more likely to include gender outgroup peers who performed well at the activities (controlling for age). Interestingly, children’s status within the inequality was also related to their ToM performance. Children who were advantaged by the inequality were less likely to pass subsequent ToM assessments compared to those who were disadvantaged by the inequality. Overall, results provide novel insights into children’s developing conceptions of fairness. Specifically, results detail the critical role of children’s perspective within a context in their perceptions of, and responses to, the context. Results also have implications for fostering positive intergroup relationships, improving children’s concern for rectifying first and third-person inequalities, and for our understanding of how children’s position within a context relates to their ability to understand others’ mental states.Item Bullying and exclusion in intergroup contexts: The relation between social reasoning, social information processing, and personal experience(2007-05-09) Margie, Nancy Rawle Geyelin; Killen, Melanie; Human Development; Digital Repository at the University of Maryland; University of Maryland (College Park, Md.)As many as 77% of children and young adolescents are bullied (Hoover, Oliver, & Hazler, 1992), with short- and long-term negative consequences for victims and victimizers (Hawker & Boulton, 2000). While physical bullying is the most visible method, exclusion is used frequently to bully (Seals & Young, 2003). Despite a strong theoretical link indicating that bullying falls squarely in the moral domain (Killen & Nucci, 1995; Smetana, 2006; Turiel, 1983; Wolke, Woods, Stanford, & Schulz, 2001), few studies have examined how children evaluate bullying from a moral perspective. Additionally, how moral reasoning is related to experiences with bullying has not been empirically tested, although theoretical work suggests that the two are influenced by social information processing (SIP; Arsenio & Lemerise, 2004). Race/ethnicity may also influence evaluations of bullying. Little research has examined race/ethnicity as it pertains to bullying, however, except to determine prevalence rates (Hanish & Guerra, 2000). While studies have found that race/ethnicity affects moral reasoning and decision-making (Dovidio & Gaertner, 1998; Lawrence, 1991; Margie, Killen, Sinno, & McGlothlin, 2005), race/ethnicity's impact on reasoning about bullying, especially exclusion as a form of bullying, is unknown. The current study surveyed 265 European-American 6th and 9th grade boys and girls to examine the relation between children's social reasoning (SR), SIP, and personal experiences with bullying, and how children's SR and SIP is affected by the race/ethnicity of those involved. The survey assessed judgments, justifications, intent attributions, social goals, and response selection in same-race and cross-race peer interactions (European-American and African-American), and assessed personal bullying experiences. Children with more bullying experience rated bullies' actions less wrong; were more likely to justify the bully's action by blaming the victim and less likely to consider the victim's feelings; attributed more hostile intent; chose more aggressive and less assertive responses; and chose more aggressive and less relational goals for victims. Participants were more likely to attribute aggressive goals to bullies and select aggressive goals for victims in same-race than in cross-race situations. Aggressive victim goals and aggressive responses partially mediated the relation between bullying experience and judgments, blaming victim justification, and victim's feelings justification.