About this paper symposium

---

Panel information
Panel 7. Diversity, Equity & Social Justice

Paper #1
Defining Youth Peacebuilding in Conflict and Non-Conflict Settings
Author information	Role
Dr. Laura K. Taylor, Ph.D., University College Dublin, Ireland	Presenting author
Vivian Liu, University College Dublin, Ireland	Non-presenting author
Bethany Corbett, Ulster University, Northern Ireland	Non-presenting author
Juliana Valentina Duarte Valderrama, Konrad Lorenz University, Colombia	Non-presenting author
Léïla Eisner, University of Zurich, Switzerland	Non-presenting author
Jeanine Grütter, University of Konstanz, Switzerland	Non-presenting author
Eran Halperin, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel	Non-presenting author
Tabea Hässler, University of Zurich, Switzerland	Non-presenting author
Claudia Pineda-Marín, Konrad Lorenz University, Colombia	Non-presenting author
Ilana Ushomirsky, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel	Non-presenting author
Abstract
The science of peace does not necessitate violent conflict. We argue that peacebuilding (defined as constructive engagement addressing the immediate impact and root causes of episodic and structural violence) can be studied in both conflict-affected countries and stable democracies. Central to this claim is that peacebuilding can strengthen quality peace (above and beyond negative peace, defined by the lack of war and conflict, to strive for positive peace, defined by intergroup harmony and social justice). Although often overlooked in scientific research, youth are at the forefront of peacebuilding. Drawing from the Developmental Peacebuilding Model (Taylor, 2020), youth can build peace through outgroup prosocial behaviour to promote constructive change across three levels of the social ecology – the microsystem (e.g., interpersonal helping), the mesosystem (e.g., collective action), and the macrosystem (e.g., cultural change). In addition, children’s outgroup prosocial behaviour also varies depending on the target and type of prosocial behaviour. In the current project, we use mixed methods to investigate adolescents’ and young adults’ concepts of peacebuilding across these three levels of the social ecology, as well as specify the targets and types of their prosocial behaviour. We intergrate four different contexts that vary in their severity and recency of conflict (or lack thereof)—Northern Ireland, Colombia, Israel, and Switzerland—to examine how peacebuilding may look similar or different across a continuum of peace and conflict. Study 1 involved focus groups (N = 199) with adolescents (ages 14-17) and young adults (ages 18-26). We prompted participants about their attitudes and experiences with building peace, and explored whether peacebuilding as defined in the current literature maps onto their lived experiences. We find that the target and types of peacebuilding actions (i.e., outgroup prosocial behaviour) varied across the four contexts. In Study 2, we recruit from the same demographics (planned N = 4800) and utilise a quantitative design to compare how this comprehensive concept of youth peacebuilding across different levels (scales informed by Study 1) is distinct from other related concepts examined in the past (e.g., civic engagement, general prosocial behaviour). Preliminary findings will be shared.

Paper #2
A Longitudinal Investigation of the Relation between Parenting and Youth’s Prosocial Behavior towards Other-Gender Peers
Author information	Role
Dr. Sonya Xinyue Xiao, Ph.D., Northern Arizona University, United States	Presenting author
Zehra Gülseven, Virginia Tech, U.S.	Non-presenting author
Zili Zhong, Northern Arizona University, U.S.	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Prosocial behavior refers to voluntary acts intended to benefit others such as helping and sharing. It is a key aspect of character development and social emotional competence that benefits individuals and societies. However, individuals are not indiscriminately prosocial toward everyone. Prior research has shown that children and adolescents are more prosocial toward people who are like them (i.e., ingroup members) more so than people dissimilar from themselves (Renno & Shutts, 2015; Sierksma et al., 2017). However, it remains relatively unclear how parent socialization is related to youth’s intregroup prosocial behavior. Drawing from the gender development literature and parenting literature (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 2015, Tenenbaum & Leaper, 2002), in the present study, we focused on examining parental warmth and gender socialization practices in relation to youth’s altruistic (i.e., selfless behaviors) and public (i.e., behaviors done in front of others) prosocial behavior toward other-gender peers. We tested both direct main effects and interactions of the two types of parenting in predicting youth’s prosocial behavior toward other-gender peers a year later. Participants were 126 early adolescents (Mage = 12.64, SDage = 1.26; 53.2% boy, 42.9% girls, and 2.4% transgender; 8.7% Asian, 23% Black, 4.8% Latinx, 57.1% non-Hispanic White, and 3.2% multiracial) and 145 parents of adolescents (51.7% biological mother, 0.7% stepmother, 46.2% biological father; 49% men, 49.7% women, and 0.7% transgender; 11.7% Asian, 18.6% Black, 4.8% Latinx, 63.4% non-Hispanic White). At Year 1, a composite of parental gender socialization practices was formed by averaging parents’ and adolescents’ report (adapted from Umaña-Taylor et al., 2004), parents reported their warmth (Robinson et al., 2001). At both Year 1 and Year 2, adolescents reported their altruistic and public prosocial behavior toward other-gender peers (Carlo et al., 2003). All measures demonstrated satisfactory Cronbach’s alphas (greater than .72). Descriptive statistics are displayed in Table 1. Controlling for parental race, youth race, parental gender, youth gender, and construct stability for prosocial behaviors, path analyses using Mplus showed a negative main effect of gender socialization predicting later altruistic prosocial behavior toward other-gender peers (β = -.33, p = .01) and a negative main effect for later public prosocial behavior toward other-gender peers (β = .25, p = .04). Further, warmth negatively predicted public prosocial behavior toward other-gender peers (β = -.19, p = .01). Further, the warmth and gender socialization interaction was significant for both prosocial behaviors. As Figure 1 panels (a) and (b) show, gender socialization significantly predicted youth’s later altruistic and public prosocial behaviors when parental warmth was relatively high. These findings are consistent with socialization models (Grusec & Goodnow, 1994) that children internalize parental messages better when the parent-child relationship is warm. Further, as Figure 1 panels (c) and (d) show, treating gender socialization as a moderator, warmth was particularly important for youth’s prosocial behaviors only when parental gender socialization is relatively low. Together, these findings show that both global and specific parenting practices inform youth’s development of prosociality toward outgroup members.

Paper #3
Longitudinal Relation between Ethnic-Racial Socialization and Adolescents’ Prosocial Behavior towards Other-Ethnicity/Race Peers
Author information	Role
Zehra Gulseven, Ph.D., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, United States	Presenting author
Sonya Xinyue Xiao, Northern Arizona University, U.S.	Non-presenting author
Jeffrey Liew, Texas A&M University, U.S.	Non-presenting author
Gustavo Carlo, University of California, Irvine, U.S.	Non-presenting author
Abstract
Given the prevailing sociopolitical and cultural intergroup conflicts (e.g., 59% of hate crimes in the U.S. are related to race/ethnicity; Department of Justice, 2022), the promotion of prosocial behaviors among ethnic/racial groups is of critical concern. Prosocial behaviors, actions aimed to benefit others such as helping and sharing, can benefit individuals’ well-being and our society through promoting positive interpersonal relationships and social harmony (Carlo, 2014; Carlo & Pierotti, 2020; Davis et al., 2021). However, despite these personal and societal benefits, we know relatively little about the factors that foster prosocial behaviors towards the targets from other-ethnic/racial groups. Parental socialization is a key factor in adolescents’ prosocial development. However, to date, how parental socialization is related to adolescents’ prosocial behaviors towards other-ethnicity/race peers remains unanswered. There are only a few studies (Xiao et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2020) showing that parents’ racial values and beliefs are related to White children’s prosocial behaviors toward Black children suggesting the importance of considering ethnic-racial socialization practices. Additionally, adolescents’ race/ethnicity-related attitudes and behaviors in general are shaped by parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices (Priest et al., 2014). Further, adolescents are more likely to internalize parental values when they have warm relationship with their parents (Grusec & Goodnow, 1994). In this study, we examined the longitudinal relation between ethnic-racial socialization and adolescents’ prosocial behavior towards other-ethnicity/race peers a year after and the moderating role of parental warmth in these relations. The sample was 126 early adolescents (Mage = 12.64, SD = 1.26; 43% girls; 8.7% Asian, 23% Black, 4.8% Latinx, 57.1% White, and 3.2% multiracial) and 145 parents of adolescents (52% biological mother, 46% biological father). The average score of adolescents and parents reports of ethnic-racial socialization practices at year 1 was created (adapted from Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014). Parents reported their warmth (Robinson et al., 2001) at Year 1; adolescents reported their altruistic and public prosocial behaviors (Carlo et al., 2003) towards other-ethnicity/race peers at Year 1 and 2. All Cronbach’s alphas were in acceptable range. Descriptive statistics and correlations among variables are shown in Table 1. Path analyses in Mplus included baseline prosocial behaviors as statistical controls. There were significant main and interaction effects of ethnic-racial socialization and warmth on both types of prosocial behaviors towards other-ethnicity/race peers a year later (Figure 1). Ethnic-racial socialization positively predicted public and negatively predicted altruistic prosocial behaviors; in contrast, parental warmth was positively related to altruistic and negatively related to public prosocial behaviors. Additionally, the interaction between ethnic-racial socialization and warmth positively predicted altruistic and negatively predicted public prosocial behaviors. A follow up simple slope analyses revealed that higher ethnic-racial socialization was linked to higher public (β = .62, p = .01) and lower altruistic prosocial behavior (β = -.63, p = .01) when warmth was low. These findings underscore the importance of ethnic-racial socialization practices and warmth in promoting adolescents’ prosocial behaviors towards the targets from other-ethnic/racial groups. Discussion will focus on the theoretical and practical implications for the findings.

Paper #4
Empathy in Collective Action Toward Ukrainian Refugees: The Impact of War-Related Information Exposure
Author information	Role
Islam Borinca, Ph.D, University of Groningen, the Netherlands	Presenting author
Abstract
The ongoing Ukrainian-Russian war has led to widespread displacement, with millions of Ukrainian refugees seeking safety across Europe. Understanding how third-party observers respond to refugee crises is crucial for fostering support for displaced populations. Empathy, as an emotional response, plays a key role in shaping public willingness to engage in collective actions, such as donations, advocacy, or volunteerism. This research investigates whether exposure to war-related information about Ukrainian refugees increases empathy and motivates collective action in their favor. We conducted two experimental studies to explore this relationship, with a focus on empathy as a mediator between information exposure and action. We hypothesized that (1) exposure to war-related information would increase levels of empathy compared to exposure to neutral information, (2) higher empathy would mediate the relationship between exposure to war-related information and collective action intentions, and (3) controlling for political ideology and empathy fatigue would not alter these relationships. The first study involved 225 Irish participants (Mage = 38.50, SDage = 10.95), recruited via Prolific, with a gender distribution of 151 women, 70 men, 3 non-binary individuals, and one participant who preferred not to disclose. The second study expanded the sample to include 425 participants from across Europe (Mage = 29.94, SDage = 14.14), predominantly from the Netherlands, Germany, Slovakia, and Romania. This group consisted of 249 women, 173 men, and 3 non-binary individuals. Both studies used a randomized experimental design. Participants were randomly assigned to either a war-related information condition (where they were exposed to stories of Ukrainian refugees) or a neutral information condition (where they watched videos about art galleries). The videos shared the same background music to control for emotional tone. After watching the videos, participants completed validated measures of empathy (adapted from Davis, 1983) and collective action intentions (adapted from Pinto et al., 2020). To account for potential confounding factors, political ideology and empathy fatigue were included as control variables in both studies. Data collection was facilitated via Qualtrics, and participants were compensated for their time. In Study 1, a two-way ANOVA showed a significant main effect of experimental condition on empathy, F(1, 221) = 5.81, p = .017, η²ₚ = .02. Participants exposed to war information reported higher empathy (M = 5.36, SD = 1.18) compared to those in the neutral condition (M = 4.96, SD = 1.11). Collective action intentions were similarly higher in the war information condition, F(1, 221) = 7.85, p = .006, η²ₚ = .03. Study 2 replicated these results, finding that empathy mediated the relationship between war-related information and collective action intentions (β = -0.06, SE = 0.02, CI [-0.10, -0.02]). Overall, the findings suggest that exposure to war-related information about Ukrainian refugees increases empathy, which in turn fosters greater intentions to support them through collective actions. This relationship held even after controlling for political ideology and empathy fatigue, indicating that empathy plays a pivotal role in mobilizing support for refugees across diverse populations in Europe.

⇦ Back to session