Copyright Malvin Porter, Jr. 2010 - acumen - The University of ...

In contrast, gender differences were found in children’s Justification Choices. Females
were as likely to select Prosocial/Care and Justice/Fair Justification Choices as males. Again, this
may be a sample effect representing a tendency toward middle-class prosocial norms. It also
suggest that 5 th grade boys and girls in this sample have a typical age-appropriate developmental
sensitivity for social norms of fair and just behavior among peers. However, this study found that
5 th grade boys were more likely to select Aggressive/Retribution Justification Choices than 5 th
grade girls, which may suggests that boys may be more emotionally predisposed to aggression
than girls. This finding may also suggest that boys, who are socialized to be independent and self
reliant in solving problems, may have fewer initial mental schemas for resolving conflict than
girls once the male brain is flooded with stress hormones in response to perceived harm. Fifth
grade girls in this study were more likely to select Justice/Fair Justification Choices than males.
Whereas boys and girls engage in both physical and relational aggression, this finding suggests
that 5 th grade girls may view aggressive peer conflicts less emotionally than boys; or, perceive
that victims will experience less harm from prosocial engagement with bully perpetrators and by
appealing to social support networks for resolving conflict without resorting to personal
aggression.
Story Variables
Story Character Role
This study found that children’s CBVS Action Choices and CBVS Justification Choices
varied across Story Character Roles. Children were far more likely to select Prosocial Actions
for both bystander and victim story character roles suggesting that they believe that prosocial
behavioral response are better than aggressive responses for resolving peer victimization conflict.
They were also most likely to select Justice/Fair reasons for justifying their action responses,
150