IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v12y2023i5p281-d1139470.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Children Learn Social Categorization and Intergroup Attitudes When They Grow Up in Divided Contexts?

Author

Listed:
  • Edona Maloku

    (Institute for Psychological Research, Social and Organizational Psychology Unit, Leiden University, P.O. Box 9555, 2300 RB Leiden, The Netherlands)

  • Belle Derks

    (Department of Social, Health and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, Room H1.32, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands)

  • Colette Van Laar

    (Center for Social and Cultural Psychology, University of Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, P.O. Box 3727, 3000 Leuven, Belgium)

  • Naomi Ellemers

    (Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 1, P.O. Box 80125, 3508 TC Utrecht, The Netherlands)

  • Jocelyn Dautel

    (School of Psychology, Queen’s University Belfast, University Road, Belfast BT6 9SG, UK)

  • Laura K. Taylor

    (School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Newman Building, Belfield, D04 V1W8 Dublin, Ireland)

Abstract

This paper explores how group preferences develop among children living in the post-conflict context of Kosovo and how this development shapes children’s willingness to be close to their outgroup peers among the segregated majority (ethnic Albanian) and minority (ethnic Serb) members. The study was conducted in four ethnically divided primary schools, with 220 participants aged 6–10. Children played a series of games and tasks which measured ethnic ingroup preference, preference for the Kosovar flag, and willingness to be close to ethnic outgroup children. Children in this context where a new national Kosovar identity is developing following independence display very high ethnic ingroup preferences. Kosovar Serb children showed low willingness to engage with outgroup members and remained constant with age, while Kosovar Albanian children’s willingness to engage with the outgroup was present among younger children but diminished with age. Results add to the literature on the underlying process by which identity develops among segregated majority and minority who have little or no opportunities to interact. Lack of intergroup contact hinders the development of more positive intergroup relations. To build a peaceful coexistence, programs which connect the segregated schools and facilitate intergroup contact, especially among the younger age groups, are recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Edona Maloku & Belle Derks & Colette Van Laar & Naomi Ellemers & Jocelyn Dautel & Laura K. Taylor, 2023. "How Do Children Learn Social Categorization and Intergroup Attitudes When They Grow Up in Divided Contexts?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-23, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:12:y:2023:i:5:p:281-:d:1139470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/12/5/281/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/12/5/281/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Henrich & Steven J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan, 2010. "Most people are not WEIRD," Nature, Nature, vol. 466(7302), pages 29-29, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John A. List, 2024. "Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(7999), pages 491-499, February.
    2. Bouma, J.A. & Nguyen, Binh & van der Heijden, Eline & Dijk, J.J., 2018. "Analysing Group Contract Design Using a Lab and a Lab-in-the-Field Threshold Public Good Experiment," Discussion Paper 2018-049, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    3. Sahba Besharati & Rufus Akinyemi, 2023. "Accelerating African neuroscience to provide an equitable framework using perspectives from West and Southern Africa," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-4, December.
    4. Markussen, Thomas & Sharma, Smriti & Singhal, Saurabh & Tarp, Finn, 2021. "Inequality, institutions and cooperation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    5. Voigt, Stefan, 2022. "Determinant of Social Norms," ILE Working Paper Series 58, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1392-1412 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ahn, T.K. & Ostrom, Elinor & Walker, James, 2010. "A common-pool resource experiment with postgraduate subjects from 41 countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2624-2633, October.
    8. Ran Xu & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2018. "Neuroscience bridging scientific disciplines in health: Who builds the bridge, who pays for it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1183-1204, November.
    9. Cornand, Camille & Hubert, Paul, 2020. "On the external validity of experimental inflation forecasts: A comparison with five categories of field expectations," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    10. Andrea Bizzego & Mengyu Lim & Greta Schiavon & Gianluca Esposito, 2020. "Children with Developmental Disabilities in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: More Neglected and Physically Punished," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-16, September.
    11. Michael Muthukrishna & Joseph Henrich & Wataru Toyokawa & Takeshi Hamamura & Tatsuya Kameda & Steven J Heine, 2018. "Overconfidence is universal? Elicitation of Genuine Overconfidence (EGO) procedure reveals systematic differences across domain, task knowledge, and incentives in four populations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-30, August.
    12. James Derbyshire & Mandeep Dhami & Ian Belton & Dilek Önkal, 2023. "The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.
    13. Monic Sun & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang & Feng Zhu, 2012. "To Belong or to Be Different? Evidence from a Large-Scale Field Experiment in China," Working Papers 12-15, NET Institute, revised Oct 2012.
    14. Ingo S. Seifert & Julia M. Rohrer & Boris Egloff & Stefan C. Schmukle, 2021. "The Development of the Rank-Order Stability of the Big Five across the Life Span," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 1156, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    15. Sara Miñarro & Victoria Reyes-García & Shankar Aswani & Samiya Selim & Christopher P Barrington-Leigh & Eric D Galbraith, 2021. "Happy without money: Minimally monetized societies can exhibit high subjective well-being," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-15, January.
    16. Bria Long & Judith E. Fan & Holly Huey & Zixian Chai & Michael C. Frank, 2024. "Parallel developmental changes in children’s production and recognition of line drawings of visual concepts," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    17. Manpreet Blessin & Sophie Lehmann & Angela M. Kunzler & Rolf van Dick & Klaus Lieb, 2022. "Resilience Interventions Conducted in Western and Eastern Countries—A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-25, June.
    18. Shawn Grover & John F. Helliwell, 2019. "How’s Life at Home? New Evidence on Marriage and the Set Point for Happiness," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 373-390, February.
    19. Cristian Badarinza & John Y. Campbell & Tarun Ramadorai, 2016. "International Comparative Household Finance," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 111-144, October.
    20. Clark Gordon L, 2021. "The Significance of Financial Competence and Risk Tolerance in Home-Related Expenditure by Jurisdiction and Regime," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 65(1), pages 12-27, March.
    21. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7t8isspkbs8hk8kol9kk9sjdl6 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Jens Rommel & Sergio Villamayor-Tomas & Malte Müller & Christine Werthmann, 2015. "Game Participation and Preservation of the Commons: An Experimental Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-15, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:12:y:2023:i:5:p:281-:d:1139470. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.