In-group and out-group attitudes of Muslim children

Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 31 (2010) 379–385

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology

In-group and out-group attitudes of Muslim children Fadwa B. Elashi ⁎, Candice M. Mills, Meridith G. Grant School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences, The University of Texas at Dallas, 800 West Campbell Road, Richardson, TX 75081, USA

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 23 June 2009 Received in revised form 25 June 2010 Accepted 12 July 2010 Available online 17 August 2010 Keywords: Muslim Children In-group Stereotypes Attributions Preferences

a b s t r a c t Although negative stereotypes towards Muslims escalated after the events of September 11th, little is known about how Muslim children think about their own group members. Therefore, the current study examined Muslim children's attitudes towards Muslims and non-Muslims. Sixty-five 5- to 8-year-old Muslim children, enrolled in an Islamic school, engaged in two tasks. In the attribution task, children rated pictures of Muslims and non-Muslims on an adjective bipolar scale containing positive and negative adjectives. In the preference task, children were asked who they preferred as a neighbor, teacher, and friend. Children made more positive attributions for Muslims than non-Muslims, with young children providing more negative evaluations of non-Muslims than older children. Children also preferred Muslims as potential teachers, neighbors, and friends. Implications of Muslim children's attitudes towards in-group and out-group members are discussed. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Introduction In the aftermath of September 11th, negative stereotypes towards Muslim individuals escalated across the nation (Council on AmericanIslamic Relations (CAIR), 2006). Many Americans held lingering resentment and reservations towards Muslim-Americans, which was reinforced by what millions of Americans saw on television (Hendricks, Ortiz, Sugie, & Miller, 2007; Panagopoulos, 2006; Shaheen, 2003). Much of the media portrayed images of Muslims as uncivilized, brutal, heartless, religious fanatics who only care for wealth and power (Shaheen, 2003). In 2006, CAIR found that approximately 1 in 4 Americans believe that Islam is a religion of hatred and violence. In addition, when asked about the first thought that comes to mind when hearing the word ‘Muslim,’ 26% of Americans reported words such as violence, hatred, terrorists, war, guns, and rag-heads (CAIR, 2006). Moreover, objects or symbols related to the word ‘Muslim,’ such as the hijab (i.e., female head covering) and emblematic structures, were frequently identified to initiate hate victimization (Hendricks et al., 2007). As a result, approximately 83% of Muslim individuals reported an increase in implicit racism and discrimination following September 11th, with “hearing or being told an offensive joke” as the most commonly endorsed experience (Sheridan, 2006). Such discrimination could pose a great threat to young Muslim-Americans' identity development. Indeed, members of minority groups often strive to find an appropriate balance between identifying with their country (or ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: + 1 972 883 6075; fax: + 1 972 883 2491. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (F.B. Elashi), [email protected] (C.M. Mills). 0193-3973/$ – see front matter. Published by Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2010.07.004

their parents' country) of origin and their host country (Deaux, 2000). Moreover, balancing one's identity becomes especially difficult when an individual living in a host country is targeted for being a member of an out-group. In such cases, the individual must decide whether to accept the host country's practices at the cost of isolating his or her own cultural practices or to integrate both identities without hurting either one. Many young Muslim-Americans face difficulties with their Muslim identities because of their out-group membership and unfair victimization (Sirin & Fine, 2007; Sirin, Bikmen, Mir, Fine, Zaal, & Katsiaficas, 2008; Zaal, Salah, & Fine, 2007). In fact, although some integrate their Muslim and American identities, about 40% of Muslim-Americans ages 18 to 25 years feel that their identities are separate or in conflict (Sirin et al., 2008). Therefore, it is evident that the negative attributions and stereotypes our broader society holds towards Muslims may impact the well-being of Muslim adults. However, how much do the effects of negative stereotypes extend into childhood? Although little research has examined the effects of negative stereotypes on Muslim children, there is a significant body of research examining its effects on other minority groups that, like MuslimAmericans, are also subjected to negative attributions and stereotypes. More specifically, researchers have examined how the negative stereotypes can affect the types of attributions children make towards members of stigmatized groups (Augoustinos & Rosewarne, 2001; Bigler & Liben, 1993; Brylinsky & Moore, 1994; Musher-Eizenman, Holub, Miller, Goldstein, & Edwards-Leeper, 2004). For example, one study found that children ages 4 to 9 years attributed more negative traits to AfricanAmericans, whereas they attributed more positive traits CaucasianAmericans (Augoustinos & Rosewarne, 2001; Bigler & Liben, 1993). Likewise, research on stereotypes towards overweight individuals has found that children around the age of 5 endorse more negative traits for

380

F.B. Elashi et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 31 (2010) 379–385

overweight individuals and more positive traits for thin or averageweight individuals (Brylinsky & Moore, 1994; Musher-Eizenman et al., 2004). In addition to the negative attributions children may make towards stereotyped groups, children may also make choices that are consistent with their stereotyped beliefs (Averhart & Bigler, 1997; MusherEizenman et al., 2004). For example, in one study children not only made negative attributions towards overweight individuals, they also indicated that they would rarely prefer to be friends with overweight individuals when contrasted against thin and average-weight individuals (Musher-Eizenman et al., 2004). Similarly, African-American children ages 5 to 7 years chose a lighter-complexioned individual over a darker-complexioned individual when asked whom they would prefer as a potential teacher, neighbor, and friend (Averhart & Bigler, 1997). Stereotypes have also been found to influence behaviors other than selecting friends, like deciding who to trust: for instance, sixth-graders with the highest levels of prejudice against African-Americans showed lower levels of trust towards African-American speakers over Caucasian speakers, even when the African-American speakers were much more credible (Aronson & Golden, 1962). Such negative attitudes towards stereotyped groups become especially problematic given that children of the stigmatized groups have been shown to make stereotype-consistent attributions towards their own group members and may even reject association with their own group (Averhart & Bigler, 1997; Clark & Clark, 1950; Dunham, Baron, & Banaji, 2007; Williams & Davidson, 2009). Indeed, the classic Clark experiment asked African-American children to color a drawing of a boy or girl “the color you like to be,” and found that only 48% of the participants preferred the color brown, whereas a significant 52% rejected the color brown (Clark & Clark, 1950). Despite some severe methodological weaknesses in this particular study, recent research yields similar findings (Averhart & Bigler, 1997; Williams & Davidson, 2009). For instance, African-American children ages 5 to 10 years assigned more negative traits to “only black people,” and provided fewer positive trait labels to pictures of African-American children than Caucasian-American children (Averhart & Bigler, 1997; Williams & Davidson, 2009). These explicit stereotypes exist towards skin tone as well: African-American children and college students sometimes view individuals with darker skin more negatively than those with lighter skin (Hall, 1992; Maddox & Gray, 2002; Williams & Davidson, 2009). Of note, some research has also found that, although some stigmatized individuals report positive attitudes towards their own in-group members when explicit measures are used, those same individuals show a preferences for the out-group when implicit measures are used (Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004; Nosek, Banaji, & Greenwald, 2002). The above research is evidence that stereotypes against groups exist even in childhood, and that members of stigmatized groups may hold negative attitudes towards their own group members. Much less is known about the stereotypes that are held against Muslim children and how those stereotypes may influence beliefs and behavior. However, there is evidence that the attitudes children hold about Muslims may also be negative. For example, in one study, Israeli children and adults perceived Arabs more negatively than Jews in that they were more likely to endorse that Arabs were dirty, lazy, unintelligent, violent, and vengeful (Bar-Tal & Teichman, 2005). Similar attitudes were also found among Israeli and Palestinian children such that both groups of children held negative attitudes about the other (Brenick, Lee-Kim, Killen, Fox, Raviv, & Leavitt, 2007). Given the negative effects stereotypes can have on a stigmatized group, and given that negative stereotypes towards Muslims exist, it is important to understand how Muslim individuals think about themselves and others, particularly within the context of the escalating stereotypes that have been documented in our culture today. The purpose of the present investigation, then, was to investigate whether Muslim children hold attitudes that are consistent with the stereotypes towards members of their own group. Previous research demonstrates that children as young as age 5 are capable of recognizing

that stereotypes exist (Augoustinos & Rosewarne, 2001; Bigler & Liben, 1993; Brown & Bigler, 2005; McKown & Weinstein, 2003). In fact, children from stigmatized groups (i.e., African-American and LatinAmerican) are more likely than children from non-stigmatized groups to be aware of broadly held ethnic stereotypes (McKown & Weinstein, 2003). Awareness of these stereotypes increases with age, tending to be fully developed by the age of 10 (McKown & Weinstein, 2003). Therefore, in order to examine the developmental differences among Muslim children's group attitudes, in the current study, we focused on children between the ages of 5 and 8 years. Tasks used by Averhart and Bigler (1997) examining stereotypes towards African-Americans were adopted in the current study to examine Muslim children's attitudes towards Muslim and nonMuslim individuals. Muslim children were asked to rate a pair of pictures (i.e., Muslim and non-Muslim adults) on a 7-point scale with a positive and negative adjective on each end. This helped provide insight into children's attitudes towards members of each group. Children's preferences were also measured by asking them which individual (i.e., Muslim or non-Muslim) they preferred as a neighbor, teacher, and friend. The experimenters' group membership was also varied between subjects to examine how group membership may impact children's responses. Previous research has found that children's responses to preference and attitude questions can sometimes be affected by the experimenter's race. For instance, in one study, children were more likely to endorse preferences that were consistent rather than inconsistent with the experimenter's race (Sattler, 1970). Therefore, for this study, two female experimenters (Muslim and non-Muslim) were involved in testing to examine potential experimenter-bias effects (i.e., if children's responses were affected by experimenter). Several predictions were made for this study. First, we expected that Muslim children would be more likely to attribute stereotypical adjectives to members of their own group given the negative attitudes in the broader American culture towards Muslim individuals. Specifically, we anticipated that Muslim children would provide more negative ratings for members of their own group and more positive ratings for members outside of their group. Second, we expected that Muslim children would be more likely to prefer nonMuslim individuals, or out-group members, as potential teachers, neighbors, and friends. Third, we expected developmental differences such that younger children would be more extreme in their preferences and negative attitudes than older children. This prediction was consistent with previous research finding that older children demonstrate fewer prejudices towards the out-group than younger children (Aboud, 1988). Finally, we also expected that if children were influenced by the experimenter's group membership, then children would provide more positive attitudes towards Muslim individuals when tested by a Muslim experimenter and more positive attitudes towards non-Muslim individuals when tested by a non-Muslim experimenter. This prediction is consistent with previous research examining experimenter-bias effects (Sattler, 1970). Methods Participants Participants were 65 Muslim children ages 5 to 8 years, which included thirty five 5- and 6-year-olds (M = 5.96, SD = .55; 13 males, 22 females) and thirty 7- and 8-year-olds (M = 8.25, SD = .69; 18 males, 12 females). Participants were enrolled in kindergarten through third grade in an Islamic school, which predominantly consists of Arab- and South Asian-American students from families of middle to high socioeconomic status. The majority of the staff and faculty at the school are Muslims with the exception of a few non-Muslim teachers. Parent letters and consent forms inviting parents with children attending the school to participate in the research project were sent

F.B. Elashi et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 31 (2010) 379–385

381

home and returned within a two-week period. Twenty percent of parents agreed for their child to participate.

the test material. The testing sessions were audio-recorded after receiving verbal consent from the child.

Overview

The attribution task The attribution task utilized items from the Preschool Racial Attitudes Measure II as a racial stereotyping measure (PRAM II; Williams, Best, Boswell, Mattson, & Graves, 1975). The traits used in this measure are consistent with previous research examining Israeli children's attributions of Arabs (Bar-Tal & Teichman, 2005). Participants were told that they will be playing a game with some pictures and words that help them know more about them. The words, however, were all mixed up such that “we do not know anything about the pictures in the game.” The experimenter asked the child if he or she would help identify which words describe each picture. Once the child agreed, the experimenter presented the child with the training protocol. During training, participants were asked to place a picture of a teddy bear, rock, and ball on the scale with a descriptive word (i.e., hard and soft) on each end. The child was informed that the closer the picture was to the word, the more descriptive it was of that object. The child was also told that both words can equally describe a picture (i.e., a ball can be hard and soft) and that it is appropriate to place a picture in the middle of the scale. Once the child identified where each picture belonged and showed an understanding of how the rating scale is used, the experimenter proceeded with the trials. During testing, participants were introduced to the photos of the Muslim and non-Muslim individuals. The pictures of these individuals matched the child's gender. The order of the presentation of the photos was randomized so that some children were first presented with the Muslim individual and then the non-Muslim, and vice versa. To help ensure the proper identification of the individuals, names were provided for each picture (Muslim: Said [adult male], Fatima [adult female]; non-Muslim: John [adult male], Jennifer [adult female]). Participants were also told whether the individual “is a Muslim” or “not a Muslim.” There were a total of 12 word pairs consisting of one positive trait and one negative trait (i.e., smart/ stupid; kind/mean; nice/naughty) on each end of the scale. Word presentation was also counterbalanced, so that half of the participants received a different presentation of the words than the other half. Participants were asked to place the picture close to the word they thought it described. They were reminded that they could place the picture in any of the boxes as long as it was close to the word it described best. Participants were also reminded that they could ask about the definition of any word they did not understand. To prevent any misinterpretation of the child's responses, the experimenter repeated the child's choices by saying: “So, you think Said/Fatima is _____ and John/Jennifer is _____, right?” Once the child agreed with the statement, the experimenter proceeded with the next pair of traits. After completing all 12 pairs, the experimenter thanked the child for helping “sort out all the cards” and introduced the preference task.

Two major tasks were administered: the attribution and preference tasks. In the attribution task, participants were asked to rate pictures of a Muslim and non-Muslim adult on a 7-point scale with a positive (e.g., good, clean, friendly) and negative (e.g., bad, dirty, unfriendly) word on each end. During the preference task, participants were asked about whom they would prefer as a neighbor, teacher, and same-sex friend. A reliability analysis revealed that the measures demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach's α = .84) for the attribution task and moderate reliability (Cronbach's α = .60) for the preference task. We chose to use the semantic differential technique for both tasks because it provides children with the ability to indicate the degree to which they attribute a trait to or prefers an individual by placing their responses in one of the many ratings available. This is in contrast to a forced-choice design in which children must choose between a limited number of options (e.g., which of two people is “good”). This helps minimize the possibility of misinterpreting participants' responses (Stager & Burke, 1982). This technique has been used in previous research examining stereotypes (Musher-Eizenman et al., 2004; Stager & Burke, 1982), though never to examine stereotypes towards Muslims. Two female experimenters, one Muslim and one non-Muslim, of approximately the same age and physical appearance, were involved in testing the participants individually in order to examine the possibility that the experimenter's apparent group membership might bias children's responses. Materials Participants were presented with four different sets of pictures of Muslim and non-Muslim individuals. A set of 24 pictures were obtained from an internet source and were pre-tested by a group of 23 college students. As part of this pre-test, college students rated the series of pictures on a 5-point scale of attractiveness and strength of emotions (i.e., how happy or how sad). They were also asked to provide an estimated age for each picture. The final selection of pictures consisted of adult Muslim and non-Muslim pairs with similar ratings on attractiveness, strength of emotion, and age. See Appendix A for sample pairs. Each picture card was color printed, laminated, and cut to be approximately 3 × 3.5 inches. During the tasks, the pictures were placed on a paper scale consisting of seven empty boxes equal to the size of the pictures (see Appendix B for scale). Below the series of seven boxes, an additional two boxes, one on each side of the scale, were included where the words (for the attributions task) and the pictures (for the preferences task) were placed. The scale was printed on an 11 × 17 inch white printing paper and used for both tasks in the study. Following the attribution and preference tasks, the experimenter read the child a short story to ensure a positive conclusion to the session. The story, titled “Yousuf, Bob, and the Thirsty Dog,” was written and illustrated by the first author. In the story, a Muslim character named Yousuf and a non-Muslim character named Bob, were friends and enjoyed a similar activity (i.e., going to school). The story concluded with the characters performing a positive act together (i.e., helping a thirsty dog) to discourage stereotypical attributions towards the groups represented by both characters. Procedure Participants were individually interviewed in a quiet space in the school. Each session lasted 10 to 15 min. Experimenters talked with the child briefly to establish rapport prior to testing. Children sat across from the experimenter to ensure that they could properly view

The preference task The preference task was developed based on research by Averhart and Bigler (1997) in order to examine children's preferences for Muslim and non-Muslim individuals. For this task, participants were asked preference questions to assess which group they “like more” by indicating whom they would prefer as a neighbor, teacher, and samesex friend. After the attribution task, the experimenter informed the child that there was one more game to play. The same scale used in the attribution task was also used in the preference task. Participants were asked to choose a game piece to use during the task. The experimenter then informed the child that, “you will be asked questions about some pictures and it's going to be your job to place your game piece closer to the picture you like more.” During training for the preference task, the experimenter presented the child with a picture of candy and vegetables. The experimenter asked the child to place his or her game piece in one of

382

F.B. Elashi et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 31 (2010) 379–385

the boxes closer to the picture he or she likes more. The experimenter also reminded the child that he or she may place the game piece in any of the boxes and may also place it in the middle if he or she likes both items. The experimenter then proceeded with the remaining questions. During testing, the participants were first asked whom they would prefer as an adult neighbor. A pair of pictures was presented and the child was asked to follow the same instructions discussed during training. Once the child answered the question, the experimenter repeated the child's response by saying, “So, you like __________ to be your neighbor more than ____________.” The experimenter continued asking the child questions about which adult teacher and same-sex friend he or she would prefer. Like the attribution task, names were provided to help ensure proper identification (Muslim: Ahmed [adult male], Khadijah [adult female], Mariam [female child], and Mohammad [male child]; non-Muslim: Brian [adult male], Stephanie [adult female], Allison [female child], and David [male child]). Concluding the study Once both the attribution and preference tasks were completed, the experimenter moved on to read the book titled, “Yousuf, Bob, and the Thirsty Dog” to end the session positively. No data was collected for this portion of the experiment. Results The primary purpose of this study was to gain insight into children's attitudes towards Muslim and non-Muslim individuals. The results for the attribution task are presented first, followed by the results for the preference task. See Table 1 for the mean ratings of both tasks. Attribution task measures In the attribution task, children's responses for each pairing were converted to a 7-point scale, for which higher numbers meant more positive attributions and lower numbers meant more negative attributions. For instance, for the pairing of smart and stupid, the closer the child placed the picture to smart, the higher the rating and the more positive the attribution. Composite scores were calculated for each participant by dividing the sum of the ratings of the Muslim and non-Muslim individuals by the number of trials (i.e., 12 trials). Consequently, each participant had two composite scores, one for the Muslim individual and one for the non-Muslim individual. Counter to our hypotheses, participants provided higher average ratings for Muslim individuals (M = 6.55, SD = .81) than non-Muslim individuals (M = 2.90, SD = 1.87). A Repeated Measures ANOVA was conducted, comparing ratings for the group type (Muslim and nonMuslim) across age group and experimenter. There was a main effect of group type (Muslims and non-Muslims) such that overall children attributed more positive adjectives to Muslim individuals than nonMuslim individuals, F(1, 61) = 166.05, p b .001. There was also an

interaction between group type and age group such that older children rated the Muslim and non-Muslim pictures more similarly than younger children, F(1, 61) = 7.98, p b .01. No additional interactions were found. See Fig. 1 for the graph. Although the above results provide insight into the differences in ratings between Muslim and non-Muslim individuals, they do not demonstrate whether the differences were due to children providing more positive attributions to Muslim individuals or more negative attributions to non-Muslim individuals. Past research has demonstrated a clear distinction between children's in-group favoritism (i.e., positivity) and out-group derogation (i.e., negativity)— one can favor the in-group without impeding out-group attitudes (Cameron, Alvarez, Ruble, & Fuligni, 2001). Therefore, we also examined how positive or negative children's attributes were for both Muslim and non-Muslim individuals. Several one-sample t-tests with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons were conducted to compare children's average ratings of each group type (Muslim and non-Muslim) to the midpoint of the scale. That is, if children's average ratings were different from the midpoint in a positive direction, their attitudes were positive, and if children's average ratings were different in a negative direction, their attitudes were negative. Overall, children's average ratings towards the Muslim individual were significantly more positive than the midpoint of the scale, revealing that they made positive attributions, t(64) = 25.19, p b .001. In contrast, children's average ratings towards the non-Muslim individual were significantly more negative than the midpoint of the scale, revealing that they made negative attributions, t(64) = 4.74, p b .001. Looking at each age group separately for each individual, we found that both younger and older children made positive attributions for the Muslim individual, t(34) = 16.30, p b .001 and t(29) = 20.37, p b .001, respectively. In contrast, for the non-Muslim individual, younger children made negative attributions, t(34) = 5.80, p b .001 whereas, older children did not, t(29) = 1.11, p = .28. In other words, younger children were more negative in their ratings towards out-group members than older children. Preference task measures In the preference task, children's responses for each pairing were converted to a 7-point scale. Higher numbers demonstrated a stronger preference for the non-Muslim individual, whereas lower numbers demonstrated a stronger preference for the Muslim individual. Composite scores were calculated by averaging the preference ratings for the neighbor, teacher, and same-sex friend items. A composite score of 1.84 (SD = 1.11) indicated that on average, children showed an overall preference for having a Muslim individual as a neighbor, teacher, and same-sex friend. A one-sample t-test comparing the composite score to chance level (4) revealed that Muslim children's preference for Muslim individuals were greater than chance, t(64) = 15.71, p b .001. A Repeated Measures ANOVA was conducted using the composite score, comparing preference ratings across age group and experimenter.

Table 1 Mean ratings for the attribution and preference tasks. Age group

Age group Younger

Older

Combined

Attribution task

Muslim experimenter Non-Muslim experimenter Total Muslim experimenter Non-Muslim experimenter Total

Preference task

Muslim

Non-Muslim

Neighbor

Teacher

Friend

M (SD)

M (SD)

M (SD)

M (SD)

M (SD)

6.41 6.72 6.53 6.87 6.19 6.57 6.55

(1.07) (.58) (.92) (.27) (.94) (.69) (.82)

2.32 2.15 2.26 3.35 4.11 3.65 2.90

(1.58) (2.13) (1.78) (1.76) (1.60) (1.71) (1.87)

1.91 1.08 1.60 1.28 1.83 1.50 1.55

(1.90) (.27) (1.56) (1.18) (1.34) (1.25) (1.42)

1.82 1.38 1.66 1.33 2.83 1.93 1.78

(1.59) (.96) (1.39) (.77) (1.40) (1.29) (1.34)

2.41 1.38 2.03 1.94 2.92 2.33 2.17

(1.99) (.87) (1.72) (1.70) (1.56) (1.69) (1.70)

Note. Both tasks used a 7-point scale. Higher scores on the attribution task indicate positive attitudes, whereas lower scores indicate negative attitudes. Higher scores on the preference task indicate a stronger preference for non-Muslim individuals, whereas lower scores indicate a stronger preference for a Muslim individual.

F.B. Elashi et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 31 (2010) 379–385

383

Discussion

Fig. 1. Attribution ratings for Muslim and non-Muslim individuals by age group.

No main effects were found. However, an interaction effect was found between age group and experimenter, F(1, 61) = 11.05, p b .01 (see Fig. 2). Older children's preferences for Muslim individuals were less strong when tested by a non-Muslim experimenter than when tested by a Muslim experimenter, t(28) = 2.71, p b .05. In contrast, younger children's preferences for Muslim individuals were stronger when tested by a non-Muslim experimenter, t(33) = 2.02, p b .05. Nonetheless, although children's responses were affected by the experimenter, children across age groups still showed a strong preference for Muslim individuals with ratings clearly different from the midpoint of the scale. To understand how preference scores may vary depending upon the relationship (i.e., neighbor, teacher, and friend), a Repeated Measures ANOVA across age group and experimenter was conducted on the preference scores for each kind of relationship (see Table 1 for relationship type means). There was a main effect of relationship, F(2, 122) = 4.13, p b .05, but no additional effects or interactions were found. Post-hoc comparisons on the relationship scores with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons revealed a significant difference between the neighbor and friend preference ratings, p b .01: Muslim children held a stronger preference for a Muslim neighbor (M = 1.52, SD =1.43) than a Muslim friend (M = 2.16, SD = 1.71). There were no significant differences between preference scores for a neighbor or friend, and a teacher (M = 2.16, SD = 1.71). It is important to note that, despite the differences between the preference scores, Muslim children still preferred Muslim individuals across relationships. Indeed, three separate onesample t-tests comparing each preference score to chance (4) revealed that Muslim children preferred Muslim neighbors, t(64) = 13.94, p b .001; teachers, t(64) = 13.33, p b .001; and friends, t(64) = 8.68, p b .001 at greater than chance levels.

Fig. 2. Interaction between preference ratings of each age group by experimenter.

The current study examined Muslim children's group attributions and preferences. Despite research on stereotypes finding negative ingroup attitudes for other stigmatized groups (Averhart & Bigler, 1997; Dunham, Baron, & Banaji, 2008; Williams & Davidson, 2009), in the current study, Muslim children did not seem to hold negative ingroup attitudes. They were more likely to attribute positive characteristics to members of their own group than individuals outside of their group. Muslim children also demonstrated positive behavioral intentions towards Muslim individuals such that they preferred a Muslim individual as a neighbor, teacher, and friend at greater than chance levels. There are a few possible reasons Muslim children did not show negative in-group biases similar to those found in children of other stereotyped groups (e.g., Averhart & Bigler, 1997; Dunham et al., 2008; Williams & Davidson, 2009). First, it may be that positive in-group attitudes have naturally developed as a result of numerous positive interactions with Muslim individuals. Participants were students attending an Islamic school, where 19 out of 20 teachers and staff members employed at the elementary campus were Muslims and followed the Islamic dress code (i.e., wore a head scarf and modest clothing). Students attending the school frequently meet outside of school hours at community events, thus developing close-knit relationships with one another. Therefore, positive in-group attributions may be partially due to the fact that participants likely engage in many positive interactions with members of their own group. Second, it is possible that minimal interactions with non-Muslim individuals may have influenced children's responses. Because children spend approximately seven hours a day at school and many hours at home with other Muslim individuals, it follows that they do not spend as much time interacting with non-Muslims. Indeed, the intergroup contact hypothesis addresses the consequences of minimal exposure to out-group members and states that prejudices among groups may be reduced once contact between the groups increases (Allport, 1979; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005, 2006; Tropp & Pettigrew, 2005). For example, there is evidence that children attending non-diverse schools are more likely to attribute discomfort during interracial interactions to stereotypes and have less sophisticated reasoning about intergroup exclusion than children attending diverse schools (see Killen, 2007). Because the sample in the current study may be more similar to the non-diverse sample in previous research, participants' out-group attitudes may be more negative than Muslim children in traditional and more diverse school settings. We will return to this issue later in the discussion. Third, Muslim children may have demonstrated positive in-group attitudes because the stereotypes addressed in this study may be more likely to be targeted towards Muslim adults rather than children. Most of the Islamic symbols (i.e., head scarf for women and beard for men) that have been found to initiate stigmatization (Hendricks et al., 2007) are associated with older Muslims rather than younger Muslims. Such salient physical features may often provide the basis for distinguishing in-group members from out-group members. Therefore, unlike AfricanAmerican children, it may be that Muslim children are at no disadvantage because they are not easily identified as Muslims (e.g., young girls do not wear a head scarf) and may be, instead, seen as more Caucasian (see Deaux, 2000). If this is true, it will be important to understand the in-group attitudes of Muslim individuals as they become more clearly identified with the symbols of their group. Finally, another possible explanation for children's positivity towards Muslim individuals may be methodological. The inclusion of ‘not’ when referring to the out-group (e.g., “David is not a Muslim”) possibly contributed to children's positivity towards Muslim individuals. This negativity bias may have referenced exclusion of the group, possibly by encouraging the child to provide negative responses towards the out-group and to think about their own

384

F.B. Elashi et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 31 (2010) 379–385

group more positively. Although using the term is useful in that it allows for the inclusion of all out-groups (as opposed to specifying a particular group, such as “David is a Christian”), future research may need to attend to this limitation. Returning to the main findings, the current study also found developmental differences in children's attributions and preferences for in-group and out-group members. With attributions, younger children made negative attributions towards out-group members, whereas older children were more neutral with their attributions. These findings appear consistent with previous research examining the group attitudes of Caucasian-American children (Aboud, 1988) in which their prejudices towards the out-group began to decline between the ages of 7 to 12. Moreover, with preferences, the degree of the preference for Muslim individuals varied not only depending on the child's age but also depending on the experimenter. Although children preferred Muslim individuals overall, older children showed stronger preferences for Muslim individuals when interviewed by a Muslim experimenter, whereas younger children showed stronger preferences for Muslim individuals when interviewed by a non-Muslim experimenter. These findings may be attributed in part to the fact that older children are more aware of the social norms and, thus, more cautious about showing racial or ethnic favoritism (Apfelbaum, Pauker, Ambady, Sommers, & Norton, 2008; Rutland, Cameron, Milne, & McGeorge, 2005). Indeed, recent research has found that older children are less willing to demonstrate awareness of racial differences in a race-relevant categorization task than in a race-neutral task (Apfelbaum et al., 2008). Previous research has also reported age differences in attributions of bias: whereas younger and older children both showed biases when tested implicitly, older children were much less likely than younger ones to show biases when tested explicitly (Dunham et al., 2008). These findings support the possibility that when a non-Muslim experimenter was present, older children may have been less likely to demonstrate their attitudes explicitly because of the belief that it is inappropriate to categorize people in mixed-race social situations. Future research should consider using an array of measures to better understand Muslim children's in-group and out-group attitudes. The current investigation adopted the semantic differential technique over the forced-choice technique to allow the child to have more choices when making an attributional decision. Utilizing a method with even fewer restrictions, however, would allow researchers to obtain a deeper understanding of how children view individuals from other groups. For example, previous research examining children's attributions and self-perceptions utilized children's illustrations as a measure of their attitudes towards other groups and themselves (Bar-Tal & Teichman, 2005; Sirin & Fine, 2007; Sirin et al., 2008; Zaal et al., 2007). With this method, children are not restricted to the terms and adjectives provided by the experimenters; instead, they are in control of the words they find appropriate to describe their illustrations and thoughts. This alternative—in contrast to the semantic differential technique—may help encourage children to speak freely about their beliefs without feelings of discomfort. In addition, future research will need to combine both implicit and explicit measures when examining the in-group attitudes in Muslim individuals. A number of studies have found that implicit measures (e.g., Implicit Association Task) may reveal more negative in-group attitudes than explicit tasks alone (Dunham et al., 2008; Nosek et al., 2002). Finally, given that previous research finds differences between in-group positivity and out-group negativity (Cameron et al., 2001), and given that the current methods did not allow us to determine if children's preferences for Muslim individuals were driven by in-group positivity or out-group negativity, it will be useful for future research to allow for such differentiation. Future research is also needed to examine in-group and out-group attitudes of Muslim children who are in more traditional school settings, typically in the United States as a minority. More specifically, because our sample consisted of students attending an Islamic school,

our findings may be limited only to Muslim children in a less diverse setting (i.e., an Islamic school where the majority are Muslim). That is, as discussed earlier, it may be that the current sample's minimal interactions with non-Muslim individuals may have influenced children to provide more positive attributions to Muslim individuals. In a more traditional school setting, however, Muslim children may have more interactions with non-Muslim individuals than children in the current study. Therefore, according to the intergroup contact hypothesis discussed previously (Allport, 1979; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005, 2006; Tropp & Pettigrew, 2005), it is possible that increasing contact with non-Muslims may promote more positive out-group attitudes among Muslim children. However, because non-Muslim children may hold negative attitudes towards Muslim children, it is also possible that increasing contact with non-Muslims may make Muslim children more aware of their group's low status, which might lead to holding neutral or negative in-group attitudes (e.g., Dunham et al., 2008). Yet another possibility is that Muslim children will continue to hold positive in-group attitudes, and that increased contact with nonMuslim children only increases their out-group attitudes. If this is true, it may be important to consider whether the stereotypes towards Muslim children have not been as strong as the stereotypes for other stigmatized groups. Because research to date has focused exclusively on the negative stereotypes that adults hold towards Muslim individuals (CAIR, 2006; Hendricks et al., 2007; Panagopoulos, 2006), additional research is needed to examine the attitudes nonMuslim children1 hold about Muslim individuals. It will be important for future research examining Muslim children from more diverse environments to keep in mind that recruitment of Muslim children from public schools may sometimes be difficult for a number of reasons. For the current study, the investigators were able to find participants due to their centralized location (i.e., an Islamic school where they regularly meet). In some regions of the country, such as our own, the majority of children whose families go to the mosque regularly attend the private Islamic school associated with the mosque. Therefore, in order to be able to recruit a reasonably sized sample of Muslim children attending public schools, recruitment measures would need to be more extensive, perhaps involving coordinating with a number of public schools and mosques. In addition to the difficulty with finding an adequate sample size, Muslim participants may be more reluctant to participate in unfamiliar activities. Recent research has found that many Muslims have become very suspicious as a result of the post-9/11 climate (Caidi & MacDonald, 2008). As a result, they may hesitate to participate in research, making it potentially difficult to find a sample that can be generalized to the broader Muslim population. Indeed, this reluctance may partially explain the low response rate observed with this current sample. Therefore, although it will be important to examine Muslim individuals from more diverse settings in future studies, researchers should keep these issues in mind when recruiting their samples. In conclusion, this research shows that despite the increase in negative stereotypes towards Muslim individuals since the events of September 11th, 2001, these stereotypes may not be present in how Muslim children view themselves. Still, because negative stereotypes towards Muslim individuals have increased drastically over a short period of time, researchers have an important opportunity to examine how stereotypes spread through a culture and influence beliefs and behavior. Although future research is needed to better understand how children understand and are affected by these stereotypes over

1 Bar-Tal and Teichman (2005) have examined non-Muslim (in this case, Israeli) children's attitudes towards Arabs, finding negative attitudes. However, these studies were conducted in Israel and focused on attitudes specifically towards Arabs. Future research is needed to understand non-Muslim children's attributions towards Muslims in other environments, such as the United States.

F.B. Elashi et al. / Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 31 (2010) 379–385

the course of development, this research takes an important first step in understanding how Muslim children view members of their own group. Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to the staff, parents, and students of Brighter Horizons Academy. A special thanks to Dr. Shayla C. Holub and the University of Texas at Dallas Think Lab members for their assistance in this project. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2010.07.004. References Aboud, F. E. (1988). Children and prejudice. New York, NY: Blackwell. Allport, G. W. (1979). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. Apfelbaum, E. P., Pauker, K., Ambady, N., Sommers, S. R., & Norton, M. I. (2008). Learning (not) to talk about race: When older children underperform in social categorization. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1513−1518. Aronson, E., & Golden, B. (1962). The effect of relevant and irrelevant aspects of communicator credibility on opinion change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 30, 135−146. Augoustinos, M., & Rosewarne, D. L. (2001). Stereotype knowledge and prejudice in children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19, 143−156. Averhart, C. J., & Bigler, R. S. (1997). Shades of meaning: Skin tone, racial attitudes, and constructive memory in African American children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 67, 363−388. Bar-Tal, D., & Teichman, Y. (2005). Representations of Arabs by Israeli Jews: Review of empirical research. Stereotypes and prejudice in conflict (pp. 208−228). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (1993). A cognitive-developmental approach to racial stereotyping and reconstructive memory in Euro-American children. Child Development, 64, 1507−1518. Brenick, A., Lee-Kim, J., Killen, M., Fox, N. A., Raviv, A., & Leavitt, L. (2007). Social judgments in Israeli and Arab children: Findings from media-based intervention projects. In D. Lemish, & M. Götz (Eds.), Children and media at times of conflict and war (pp. 287−308). Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton Press. Brown, C. S., & Bigler, R. S. (2005). Children's perceptions of discrimination: A developmental model. Child Development, 76, 533−553. Brylinsky, J. A., & Moore, J. C. (1994). The identification of body build stereotypes in young children. Journal of Research in Personality, 28, 170−181. Caidi, N., & MacDonald, S. (2008). Information practices of Canadian Muslims post 9/11. Government Information Quarterly, 25, 348−378. Cameron, J. A., Alvarez, J. M., Ruble, D. N., & Fuligni, A. J. (2001). Children's lay theories about ingroups and outgroups: Reconceptualizing research on prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 118−128. Clark, K., & Clark, M. P. (1950). Emotional factors in racial identification and preference in negro children. Journal of Negro Education, 19, 341−350. Council on American-Islamic Relations (2006). American public opinion about Islam and Muslims. Washington, D.C.: Research Center. Deaux, K. (2000). Surveying the landscape of immigration: Social psychological perspectives. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 10, 421−431.

385

Dunham, Y., Baron, A. S., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). Children and social groups: A developmental analysis of implicit consistency in Hispanic Americans. Self and Identity, 6, 238−255. Dunham, Y., Baron, A. S., & Banaji, M. R. (2008). The development of implicit intergroup cognition. Trends in Cognitive Science, 12, 248−253. Hall, R. E. (1992). Bias among African-Americans regarding skin color: Implications for social work practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 2, 479−486. Hendricks, N. J., Ortiz, C. W., Sugie, N., & Miller, J. (2007). Beyond the numbers: Hate crimes and cultural trauma within Arab American immigrant communities. International Review of Victimology, 14, 95−113. Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of systematic justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881−919. Killen, M. (2007). Children's social and moral reasoning about exclusion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 32−36. Maddox, K. B., & Gray, S. A. (2002). Cognitive representations of Black Americans: Reexploring the role of skin tone. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 250−259. McKown, C., & Weinstein, R. S. (2003). The development of consequences of stereotype consciousness in middle childhood. Child Development, 74, 498−515. Musher-Eizenman, D. R., Holub, S. C., Miller, A. B., Goldstein, S. E., & Edwards-Leeper, L. (2004). Body size stigmatization in preschool children: The role of control attributions. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 29, 613−620. Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Harvesting implicit group attitudes and beliefs from a demonstration web site. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 101−115. Panagopoulos, C. (2006). Arab and Muslim Americans and Islam in the aftermath of 9/11. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 608−624. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2005). Allport's intergroup contact hypothesis: Its history and influence. In J. F. Dovidio, P. Glick, & L. Rudman (Eds.), Reflecting on the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport (pp. 262−277). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751−783. Rutland, A., Cameron, L., Milne, A., & McGeorge, P. (2005). Social norms and selfpresentation: Children's implicit and explicit intergroup attitudes. Child Development, 76, 451−466. Sattler, J. M. (1970). Racial “experimetner effects” in experimentation, testing, interviewing, and psychotherapy. Psychological Bulletin, 73, 137−160. Shaheen, J. (2003). Reel bad Arabs: How Hollywood vilifies a people. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 588, 171−193. Sheridan, L. P. (2006). Islamophobia pre- and post-September 11th, 2001. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21, 317−336. Sirin, S. R., Bikmen, N., Mir, M., Fine, M., Zaal, M., & Katsiaficas, D. (2008). Exploring dual identification among Muslim-American emerging adults: A mixed methods study. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 259−279. Sirin, S. R., & Fine, M. (2007). Hyphenated selves: Muslim American youth negotiating identities on the fault lines of global conflict. Applied Development Science, 11, 151−163. Stager, S. F., & Burke, P. J. (1982). A reexamination of body build stereotypes. Journal of Research in Personality, 16, 435−446. Tropp, L. R., & Pettigrew, T. F. (2005). Relationships between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups. Psychological Sciences, 16, 951−957. Williams, J. E., Best, D. L., Boswell, D. A., Mattson, L. A., & Graves, D. J. (1975). Preschool racial attitude measure II. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 494−500. Williams, T. L., & Davidson, D. (2009). Interracial and intra-racial stereotypes and constructive memory in 7- and 9-year-old African-American children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 366−377. Zaal, M., Salah, T., & Fine, M. (2007). The weight of the hyphen: Freedom, fusion and responsibility embodied by young Muslim-American women during a time of surveillance. Applied Development Science, 11, 164−177.