Does ability-grouping have impact on the attribution to intelligence in children from 6-11 years old?

Abstract

Current research predominantly focused on the effect of ability-grouping – categorizing individuals based on competence – on academic performance and self-concept. However, there is lacking research on its impact on the social-cognitive effects in younger children. Theories state that minimal conditions are required to categorize individuals into groups, and that grouping can lead to essentialism. Essentialism is the belief that certain categories have a stable, underlying and inherent essence that defines them, leading to solid and inflexible groupings. Essentialist beliefs may alter the way children perceive and behave towards others. To explore whether ability-grouping provokes essentialists beliefs, thereby affecting children’s perceptions of others intelligence, a study was conducted in 123 children (6-11 years old). Participants watched videos of an avatar performing either high or low on a novel test, followed by a question about the avatar’s attributed intelligence. This study had a 2 (ability: high vs. low; within-subjects) x 2 (grouping vs. no-grouping; between-subjects) experimental design. Data was analyzed using a linear mixed effects model and non-parametric analysis. Grouping versus not grouping children by performance did not influence the perceived intelligence of the avatar. Children believed the avatar was smarter when it had a high performance on the novel test compared to a low performance, especially in younger children. As the attribution to intelligence may be internalized, future research should identify this process further to prevent negative psychological outcomes (e.g. decreased motivation effort and challenge seeking) to happen.