We examine the conditions in which children aged 4-11 judge an objectively positive act – inclusion - relatively negatively (i.e., when violating group norms, and when performed by individuals of differing group status). Because asking children to make prosocial choices under conditions of perceived social risk is an ethical challenge, we instead asked children to evaluate the prosocial choices of third parties. We also focused on risk arising from intergroup relations. Participants heard a vignette about two fictional groups of children (minimal categories: children from the purple school, children from the yellow school), which were presented alongside a storyboard. Participants were assigned to one of two conditions: normative inclusion (low risk) or normative exclusion (high risk). In each condition, children learned about a story character who behaves prosocially towards an outgroup member. In the high risk condition, children will be informed there is a pervasive norm of division between the fictional groups. In this context, behaving prosocially towards an outgroup member may be viewed as violating an ingroup norm, which could risk reprisal from the ingroup. Conversely, in the low risk condition, no norm of division (and by extension, no salient risk) is present. Of interest, first, is if children evaluate third party prosocial behavior more negatively when it violates an ingroup norm; qualitative justifications will be obtained to shed light on the reasoning underpinning evaluations. Though existing studies demonstrate that children negatively evaluate ‘deviant’ group members - those who break ingroup norms - those studies have typically examined amoral behaviors (e.g., lying/stealing/cheating). By negatively evaluating and potentially punishing amoral, deviant group members, the group stands to protect its reputation. Yet, the novel aspect of this study would be demonstrating that children also evaluate prosocial behaviors negatively, when they conflict with an ingroup norm. A second, complementary, set of questions will assess the extent to which children expect ingroup reprisal (and the types which they might expect) as a consequence of this norm violation. Evidence that children expect the ‘outgroup prosocial’ character to face social reprisal will demonstrate they have knowledge that outgroup inclusion may be a prosocial risk, under conditions of intergroup division. Evidencing this understanding will pave the way for future studies to examine how individual differences in prosociality and risk taking might interact, to predict children’s own outgroup inclusive behaviors.Prosocial behaviour is behaviour which is performed to benefit other people (e.g. sharing, helping, comforting). Performing prosocial behaviour has positive effects within individuals (e.g. mental wellbeing), between individuals (e.g. bullying reduction), between groups (e.g. conflict reduction) and at a societal level (e.g. tolerance and collective action). Different sub-types of prosocial behaviour are associated with different antecedents and outcomes, and so it is important for researchers to consider these individually, if they are to influence their occurrence. Yet, one newly proposed type of prosocial behaviour has been largely ignored: prosocial risk taking (PSRT). That is, helping other individuals at a potential risk to oneself (Do et al., 2017). Clear examples of PSRT have been seen in recent world events (e.g. the Covid-19 pandemic and the conflict in Ukraine), and other every-day examples can be brought to mind (e.g. a child defending a friend from a bully). Given that PSRT can be seen all around us, it is surprising that very few studies have examined this construct or proposed a method to capture it. This was the focus of my PhD research, in which I developed a behavioural task to measure children's willingness to take a prosocial risk. Children could play a game that guaranteed they would win a good prize but that a peer won a bad prize, or could choose another game giving each child a 50/50 chance of winning a good/bad prize (Corbett et al., 2021). The first aim of the fellowship is to disseminate what I have already learned about children's PSRT by publishing further work from my PhD, and presenting at leading conferences in the field. New research will generate knowledge regarding the social implications of PSRT by examining it as a predictor of social inclusion. Groups tend to differ in power and status; regarding inclusion, lower status group members risk rejection from higher status group members, while the latter risk reputation damage through association with the former. Individuals who are highly prosocial in other domains (e.g. sharing) may not include in this context (i.e.

Topics: