The influence of in-group favoritism on 5 to 6-year-olds' resource-allocation decisions

5-6세 아동의 분배 결정에 내집단 선호가 미치는 영향

  • Received : 2015.05.29
  • Accepted : 2015.06.25
  • Published : 2015.06.30


The current study investigated whether in-group bias affects 5- to 6-year-old children's resource-allocation decisions. In Experiment 1, participants were asked to allocate 10 stickers between a friend (an in-group member) and a stranger (an out-group member). Children allocated significantly more stickers to friends than to strangers, suggesting that they made distributive decisions in favor of their in-group members, when they were not the beneficiary of a resource-allocation. In Experiment 2, we examined whether being one of the recipients in the resource-allocation game would affect children's decisions. The procedure was identical to that of Experiment 1 except that participants were asked to allocate stickers between themselves and a friend or a stranger. The children showed selfish distributions regardless of recipients. These results indicate that when children become one of the recipients in a resource-allocation, their self-interests override their preference for in-group members.


Supported by : 한국연구재단


  1. 유하나, 이지현, 송현주, 김영훈 (2014). 감정 고려가 만 4세 아동의 분배 행동에 미치는 효과. 한국심리학회지: 발달, 27(2), 113-129.
  2. Almas, I., Cappelen, A. W., Sorensen, E. O., & Tungodden, B. (2010). Fairness and the development of inequality acceptance. Science, 328, 1176-1178.
  3. Balliet, D., Wu, J., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2014). Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1556-1581.
  4. Billig, M., & Tajfel, H. (1973). Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 3, 27-52.
  5. Blake, P. R., & Rand, D. G. (2010). Currency value moderates equity preference among young children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31, 210-218.
  6. Brewer, M. B. (2001). Ingroup identification and intergroup conflict: When does ingroup love become outgroup hate? In R. D. Ashmore, L. Jussim, & D. Wilder (Eds.), Social identity, intergroup conflict, and conflict reduction (Rutgers Series on Self and Social Identity, Vol. 3, pp. 17-41). New York: Oxford University Press.
  7. Buchan, N., Croson, R., & Johnson, E. (2006). Let's get personal: an international examination of the influence of communication. Culture, and social distance on other regarding preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 60, 373-398.
  8. Burns, M. P., & Sommerville, J. A. (2014). "I pick you": The impact of fairness and race on infants' selection of social partners. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 93.
  9. Buttelmann, D., & Bohm, R. (2014). The ontogeny of the motivation that underlies ingroup bias. Psychological Science, 25, 1-7.
  10. Dobbs, M., & Crano, W. D. (2001). Outgroup accountability in the minimal group paradigm: Implications for aversive discrimination and social identity theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 27, 355-364.
  11. Falk, C. F., Heine, S. J., & Takemura, K. (2014). Cultural variation in the minimal group effect. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45, 265-281.
  12. Fehr, E., Bernhard, H., & Rockenbach, B. (2008). Egalitarianism in young children. Nature, 454, 1079-1084.
  13. Gummerum, M., Hanoch, Y., Keller, M., Parsons, K., & Hummel, A. (2010). Preschoolers' allocations in the dictator game: The role of moral emotions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 25-34.
  14. Hamlin, J., Mahajan, N., Liberman, Z., & Wynn, K. (2013). Not like me = bad: Infants prefer those who harm dissimilar others. Psychological Science, 24, 589-594.
  15. Harbaugh, W. T., & Krause, K. (2000). Children's altruism in public good and dictator experiments. Economic Inquiry, 38, 95-109.
  16. Hertel, G., & Kerr, N. L. (2001). Priming in-group favoritism: The impact of normative scripts in the minimal group paradigm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 316-324.
  17. Kogut, T. (2012). Knowing what I should, doing what I want: From selfishness to inequity aversion in young children's sharing behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33, 226-236.
  18. Moore, C. (2009). Fairness in children's resource allocation depends on the recipient. Psychological Science, 20, 944-948.
  19. Nesdale, D., & Flesser, D. (2001). Social identity and the development of children's group attitudes. Child Development, 72, 506-517.
  20. Olson, K., & Spelke, E. S. (2008). Foundations of cooperation. Cognition, 108, 222-231.
  21. Platow, M. J., Grace, D. M., Wilson, N., Burton, D., & Wilson, A. (2008). Psychological group memberships as outcomes of resource distributions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 835-851.
  22. Sheskin, M., Bloom, P., & Wynn, K. (2014). Anti-equality: Social comparison in young children. Cognition, 130, 152-156.
  23. Smith, C. E., Blake, P. R., & Harris, P. L. (2013). I should but I won't: Why young children endorse norms of fair sharing but do not follow them. PloS One, 8, e59510.
  24. Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 149-178.
  25. Takagishi, H., Kameshima, S., Schug, J., Koizumi, M., & Yamagishi, T. (2010). Theory of mind enhances preference for fairness. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 105, 130-137.
  26. Webster, G. D. (2003). Prosocial behavior in families: Moderators of resource sharing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 644-652.
  27. Yamagishi, T., & Mifune, N. (2008). Does Shared Group Membership Promote Altruism? Fear, Greed, and Reputation. Rationality and Society, 20, 5-30.