مجال
التميز
|
تميز دراسي و بحثي
|
|
|
البحوث المنشورة
|
|
البحث (1):
|
|
عنوان البحث:
|
Saudi Arabian children’s
reasoning about religion-based exclusion
|
رابط إلى البحث:
|
Click Here
|
تاريخ النشر:
|
20/02/2018
|
موجز عن البحث:
|
This study examined how Saudi
Arabian children (M = 10.50 years, SD = 1.61,
Range = 8-10 years) evaluate peer exclusion based on religion
when the perpetrator of exclusion was a peer or a father. Children believed that
it was more acceptable for fathers than for peers to enforce exclusion and
were more likely to use social conventional reasons to justify exclusion when
the perpetrator was a father. The discussion focuses on how social domain
theory needs to take children’s cultural community into account. Statement of
contribution What is already known on this subject? Research suggests that
children do not defer to authority in making decisions about peer exclusion.
Children tend to believe that authority figures should not order peer
exclusion because it is a moral decision. What does this study add? Unlike
children in other collectivist countries, children in Saudi Arabia support
peer exclusion ordered by a father more than a peer. Saudi children use
social conventional reasoning to justify fathers’ support for peer exclusion.
|
|
|
المؤتمرات العلمية:
|
|
المؤتمر (1):
|
|
عنوان المؤتمر:
|
9th Saudi
Students’ Conference
|
تاريخ الإنعقاد:
|
13/02/2016
|
مكان
الإنعقاد:
|
Birmingham,
UK
|
طبيعة المشاركة:
|
Poster presentation
|
عنوان المشاركة:
|
Can I play with you?: Saudi children’s reasoning regarding exclusion
based on religion and sect
|
ملخص المشاركة:
|
Children have contact with their
peers from the early stages of their development (Asher & Coie, 1990).
However, contact with peers can lead to inclusion and exclusion (or rejection)
among children.
Importantly, exclusion experiences have a
negative effect on the victims (Asher & Coie, 1990). Rejected children
report social and avoidance anxiety with less positive expectations in their
social life, and more feelings of loneliness, depression, and
dissatisfaction. Moreover, rejection negatively affects children’s academic
achievements. Generally, peer rejection has negative and long- term
consequences for children’s social development and mental health. (Asher et
al., 1984; Boivin et al., 1995). Despite the importance of exclusion in
children’s social and psychological lives, the majority of the work on this
subject has been conducted in the US and European countries, while little is
known about how children in the Arab world evaluate exclusion. Moreover,
previous studies have focused on the reasoning of exclusion based on race and
gender.
This study examined Saudi
children’s judgments and justifications of exclusion based on religion
(Muslim- non Muslim) and sect (Sunni-Shia). 124 children aged 8-11-14 year
old were interviewed. Generally, children justified their judgments using
moral, social convention and psychological reasoning.
|
|
|
المؤتمر (2):
|
|
عنوان المؤتمر:
|
The conference of European
Association for Research on Adolescence
|
تاريخ الإنعقاد:
|
16/09/2016
|
مكان
الإنعقاد:
|
La Barrosa, Spain
|
طبيعة المشاركة:
|
Poster presentation
|
عنوان المشاركة:
|
Can I play with you? : Saudi
children’s reasoning regarding exclusion based on religion and sect
|
ملخص المشاركة:
|
Little work on peer exclusion
has been conducted in Arab nations (for an exception, see Brenick et al.,
2010) and none in Arab nations has been conducted using existing social
groups. The current study focuses on exclusion amongst Saudi children based
on religion and sect (Muslim and Non-Muslim; Sunni and Shia). By doing so,
such work offers insight into how the construction of different social groups
can influence reasoning (Hopkins & Moore, 2001). This study differs from
previous work on peer exclusion by contributing to the understanding of how
the salience of categories influences children’s reasoning.
The participants comprised 107
children (67 girls; 40 boys). There were 37 children in Grade 2 (M=8.59
years, SD= .50), 43 in Grade 4 (M=10.53 year, SD= .51), and 27 in Grade 6
(M=12.44 years, SD= .51). All children were Saudi citizens. Seventy-seven
percent were Sunni and 23% were Shia Muslims.
After
obtaining parental permission, the children were interviewed individually for
approximately 15-20 minutes in a quiet room at their home. Eight vignettes
about exclusion were read to the children. In half of the vignettes the
perpetrator of the exclusion was the father and in the other half the
perpetrator was a group of peers. There were two targets of exclusion;
religion (Muslim- versus non-Muslim) and sect (Sunni versus Shia). The order
of the vignettes was counterbalanced using a Latin square design. All of the
interviews were conducted in Arabic by a Saudi interviewer. All interviews
were audiotaped and transcribed. Children’s answers were converted to a
four-point scale with a 1 scored as not accepting exclusion (not ok at all)
to 4 (ok a lot), which was scored as accepting of exclusion. Children judged
the exclusion as less acceptable when the target was matched for their
in-group (Sunni) than out-group (Shia), z = -4.46, p= .0001. Second, Sunni
children were more likely to accept the exclusion when a Shia child was
excluded than when a Muslim child, z=-3.036, p=002. Third, Sunni children
were more likely to accept the exclusion when the target was a Shia child
than a non-Muslim child, z =-2.391, p = .02. However, no differentiation in
the judgment of exclusion was made between excluding a Muslim and a Sunni
child. Indeed, both were viewed as not ok, z = -1.587, p = .113. In contrast,
Shia children’s judgments of exclusion did not differ significantly based on
religion or sect χ2 (3) = 1.39, p = .71. Shia children aged 8 were more
likely than children aged 10 or 12 to judge exclusion as acceptable. No differences
were found with Sunni children.
In sum, Sunni children showed
more in-group bias and condemned the exclusion when the excluded was Sunni.
The findings support social identity theory in that in-group bias was greater
with Sunni children condoning exclusion when the outgroup was more similar
(Shia) than when it was less similar (non-Muslim) (Tajfel,1970; Dihel,1988;
Hornsey & Hogg,2000). However, similar findings were not found with Shia
children. Our findings will be discussed in greater depth.
|
|
|
المؤتمر (3):
|
|
عنوان المؤتمر:
|
2017 SRCD Biennial Meeting
|
تاريخ الإنعقاد:
|
06/04/2017
|
مكان
الإنعقاد:
|
Austin,
Texas
|
طبيعة المشاركة:
|
Poster presentation
|
عنوان المشاركة:
|
Saudi children and their mothers’ reasoning
about exclusion
|
ملخص المشاركة:
|
Children’s peer exclusion or
rejection based on group identity (Brenick & Romano, in press; Killen et
al., 2002; Malti, Killen, & Gasser, 2012; Møller & Tenenbaum, 2011)
is related to lower academic and psychological adjustment (Coei, Lochman,
Terry, & Hyman, 1992; DeRosier, Kupersmidt, & Patterson, 1994).
Previous research on exclusion has focused on children in the US and Europe
with little work conducted in Arab nations (for an exception, see Brenick et
al., 2010). To extend this line of research to different cultures, the
current study focuses on exclusion amongst Saudi children based on religion
and sect (Muslim and Non-Muslim; Sunni and Shia). In addition, past research has not compared mothers
and children.
The participants consisted of 60
(24 boy; 36 girls) Saudi children (Sunni) and their mothers. There were 20
children in grade 2 (M= 8.51 years,
SD= .51 months), 20 children in grade 4 (M=10.55
years, SD= .51 months), and 20
children in grade 6 (M=12.40, SD= .50). Twenty-four of the children
were boys, and 36 were girls. Of the mothers, 38% had a university degree,
three mothers held a postgraduate degree, nearly 31% of them finished high
school, four mothers attended intermediate school, and only one mother was
non-educatedThe participants were of middle-class socioeconomic status, and
they were recruited on a volunteer basis.
Eight vignettes were read to the
children and mothers separately, which asked their opinion about the
acceptability of excluding a Shia or a Sunni, a Muslim or a non-Muslim by either
a peer or a father. After each vignette the participants were asked whether
or not it was ok to exclude a child from “a lot” or “a little”.
We
conducted correlational analyses and found that mothers’ and children’s
answers were related on two out of the eight comparisons (see Table 1).
We also
compared mothers and children’s answers. Because of non-normality of the
data, analyses were conducted using Wilcoxon (non-parametric test) to compare mothers and
children on the comparisons of interest. Firstly, children were more likely
than mothers to judge the exclusion as acceptable when the perpetrator was a
peer, z= – 2.43, p = .02. Secondly, children were more
likely than mothers to accept the exclusion when the perpetrator was the
father, z= – 3.50, p = .0001. Thirdly, children were more
likely than mothers to accept the exclusion of an outgroup child, z= -4.22, p = .0001. Finally, mothers and children’s judgments of exclusion
did not differ significantly when the excluded was an in-group
child, z= – 1.60, p = .12.
The findings suggest some
similarities in reasoning about exclusion between mothers and children as
suggested by Degner and Dalage (2013), but also some important differences.
The findings will be interpreted in relation to socialization of children in
this socio-cultural context.
Table 1
Correlations
between mothers’ and children’s judgements
r
|
Vignette
|
20
|
Sunni
is excluded by Shias
|
003
|
Shia
is excluded by Sunnis
|
.40**
|
Non-Muslim
is excluded by Muslims
|
-.10
|
Muslim is excluded non-Muslims
|
.04
|
Shia
father excludes Sunnis
|
.10
|
Sunni
father excludes Shias
|
.30*
|
Non-Muslim
father excludes Muslims
|
.24
|
Muslim
father excludes non-Muslims
|
*correlation is significant at
the 0.05 level; **correlation is significant at the 0.01 level.
|
|
|
|
المؤتمر (4):
|
|
عنوان المؤتمر:
|
18th European Conference on Developmental
Psychology
|
تاريخ الإنعقاد:
|
29/08/2017
|
مكان
الإنعقاد:
|
Utrecht, Netherlands
|
طبيعة المشاركة:
|
Poster presentation
|
عنوان المشاركة:
|
Saudi children’s reasoning about
exclusion based on religious identity
|
ملخص المشاركة:
|
Categorising individuals into groups based
on national and religious identity is enough to produce bias (Tajfel &
Turner, 1985). Eliash, Mills and Grant (2010) found that Muslims children
endorsed negative attributions for non-Muslims (outgroup) more than Muslims
(in- group) also they showed ingroup preference. Allport (1945) argued that
children adopting their parent’s attitudes towards out-group. One important
issue related to intergroup attitudes is peer exclusion based on group
identity. Previous research on exclusion has focused on children in the US
and Europe. Also, past research has not compared parents and children. To
extend this line of research, the current study focused on peer exclusion
amongst Saudi children and their mothers based on religion (Muslim and
Non-Muslim).
Participants: The
participants consisted of 60, 8-, 10-, and 12-year-old Saudi children Saudi
children and their mothers. They were recruited on a volunteer basis.
Procedure: Eight vignettes were read to the
children and mothers separately, which asked their opinion about the
excluding a Muslim or a non-Muslim peer by either a peer or a father.
Results: Compared to mothers, children
were more accepting of exclusion, F (1, 57)= 11.35,p = .001, partial ŋ2= .20.
For the perpetrator, participants were more likely to accept exclusion by
fathers than by peers, F(1.57)= 13.80, p = .0001,partial ŋ2 = .20. The
findings will be interpreted in relation to socialization of children in this
socio-cultural context.
Conclusion: In sum,
Saudi mothers showed tolerance and acceptance to out-group more than their
children did. The results of this study could be used as a platform to design
intervention programs build on transmitting mothers’ attitudes to their
children to promote coexistence in Saudi society.
|
|
|
المؤتمر (5):
|
|
عنوان المؤتمر:
|
The British Psychological
society’s annual conference
|
تاريخ الإنعقاد:
|
24/09/2017
|
مكان
الإنعقاد:
|
Stratford-upon-Avon.UK
|
طبيعة المشاركة:
|
Poster presentation
|
عنوان المشاركة:
|
Saudi children and their
mothers’ reasoning about exclusion
|
ملخص المشاركة:
|
Categorising individuals into groups based
on national and religious identity is enough to produce bias (Tajfel &
Turner, 1985). Eliash, Mills and Grant (2010) found that Muslims children
endorsed negative attributions for non-Muslims (outgroup) more than Muslims
(in- group) also they showed ingroup preference. Allport (1945) argued that
children adopting their parent’s attitudes towards out-group. One important
issue related to intergroup attitudes is peer exclusion based on group
identity. Previous research on exclusion has focused on children in the US
and Europe. Also, past research has not compared parents and children. To
extend this line of research, the current study focused on peer exclusion
amongst Saudi children and their mothers based on religion (Muslim and
Non-Muslim).
Participants: The
participants consisted of 60, 8-, 10-, and 12-year-old Saudi children Saudi
children and their mothers. They were recruited on a volunteer basis.
Procedure: Eight vignettes were read to the
children and mothers separately, which asked their opinion about the
excluding a Muslim or a non-Muslim peer by either a peer or a father.
Results: Compared to mothers, children
were more accepting of exclusion, F (1, 57)= 11.35,p = .001, partial ŋ2= .20.
For the perpetrator, participants were more likely to accept exclusion by
fathers than by peers, F(1.57)= 13.80, p = .0001,partial ŋ2 = .20. The
findings will be interpreted in relation to socialization of children in this
socio-cultural context.
Conclusion: In sum,
Saudi mothers showed tolerance and acceptance to out-group more than their
children did. The results of this study could be used as a platform to design
intervention programs build on transmitting mothers’ attitudes to their
children to promote coexistence in Saudi society.
|