TY - JOUR
T1 - Peer exclusion
T2 - A social convention or moral decision? Cross-cultural insights into students' social reasoning
AU - Ha, Seung Yon
AU - Lin, Tzu Jung
AU - Li, Wei Ting
AU - Kraatz, Elizabeth
AU - Chiu, Ying Ju
AU - Hong, Yu Ru
AU - Tsai, Chin Chung
AU - Glassman, Michael
N1 - Funding Information:
This research was supported by the Ohio State University Office of Research, Chiang Chin-Kuo Foundation, and the Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences of National Taiwan Normal University ( NTNU ) from The Featured Areas Research Center Program within the framework of the Higher Education Sprout Project by the Ministry of Education ( MOE ) in Taiwan. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent views of the foundation. We would like to thank the research team and the many administrators, teachers, and children without whom this study would not have been possible.
Publisher Copyright:
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2020.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - In this study, we examined the role of culture on early adolescents' social reasoning about peer exclusion. A total of 80 U.S. and 149 Taiwanese early adolescents (U.S.: Mage = 11.00, SDage = 0.48; Taiwan: Mage = 10.45, SDage = 0.39) independently completed a social reasoning essay about peer exclusion. Analyses of the essays based on social-moral theories showed that U.S. students tended to reason about peer exclusion based on social conventional thinking whereas Taiwanese students were more attentive to personal and moral issues. Despite this difference, both groups of students referred to some common social-moral concepts while reasoning about peer exclusion, including consideration of personal benefit, harming others' welfare, personal concern, and punishment. The use of social reasoning strategies was similar across the two groups of students except that Taiwanese students relied more on judgment (i.e., social-moral evaluation of someone's social conduct) whereas U.S. students generated more alternative hypotheses (i.e., presenting new hypotheses or interpretations about the given issue).
AB - In this study, we examined the role of culture on early adolescents' social reasoning about peer exclusion. A total of 80 U.S. and 149 Taiwanese early adolescents (U.S.: Mage = 11.00, SDage = 0.48; Taiwan: Mage = 10.45, SDage = 0.39) independently completed a social reasoning essay about peer exclusion. Analyses of the essays based on social-moral theories showed that U.S. students tended to reason about peer exclusion based on social conventional thinking whereas Taiwanese students were more attentive to personal and moral issues. Despite this difference, both groups of students referred to some common social-moral concepts while reasoning about peer exclusion, including consideration of personal benefit, harming others' welfare, personal concern, and punishment. The use of social reasoning strategies was similar across the two groups of students except that Taiwanese students relied more on judgment (i.e., social-moral evaluation of someone's social conduct) whereas U.S. students generated more alternative hypotheses (i.e., presenting new hypotheses or interpretations about the given issue).
KW - Cross-cultural comparison
KW - Social information processing
KW - Social knowledge
KW - Social reasoning
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85093502337&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85093502337&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1163/15685373-12340078
DO - 10.1163/15685373-12340078
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85093502337
SN - 1567-7095
VL - 20
SP - 127
EP - 154
JO - Journal of Cognition and Culture
JF - Journal of Cognition and Culture
IS - 1-2
ER -