An official website of the United States government
Anti-Black racism remains a pervasive crisis in the United States. Racist social systems reinforce racial inequalities and perpetuate prejudicial beliefs. These beliefs emerge in childhood, are difficult to change once entrenched in adolescence and adulthood, and lead people to support policies that further reinforce racist systems. Therefore, it is important to identify what leads children to form prejudicial beliefs and biases and what steps can be taken to preempt their development. This study examined how children’s exposure to and beliefs about racial inequalities predicted anti-Black biases in a sample of 646 White children (4 to 8 years) living across the United States. We found that for children with more exposure to racial inequality in their daily lives, those who believed that racial inequalities were caused by intrinsic differences between people were more likely to hold racial biases, whereas those who recognized the extrinsic factors underlying racial inequalities held more egalitarian attitudes. Grounded in constructivist theories in developmental science, these results are consistent with the possibility that racial biases emerge in part from the explanatory beliefs that children construct to understand the racial inequalities they see in the world around them.
more »
« less
A Developmental-Science Perspective on Social Inequality
Many people believe in equality of opportunity but overlook and minimize the structural factors that shape social inequalities in the United States and around the world, such as systematic exclusion (e.g., educational, occupational) based on group membership (e.g., gender, race, socioeconomic status). As a result, social inequalities persist and place marginalized social groups at elevated risk for negative emotional, learning, and health outcomes. Where do the beliefs and behaviors that underlie social inequalities originate? Recent evidence from developmental science indicates that an awareness of social inequalities begins in childhood and that children seek to explain the underlying causes of the disparities that they observe and experience. Moreover, children and adolescents show early capacities for understanding and rectifying inequalities when regulating access to resources in peer contexts. Drawing on a social reasoning developmental framework, we synthesize what is currently known about children’s and adolescents’ awareness, beliefs, and behavior concerning social inequalities and highlight promising avenues by which developmental science can help reduce harmful assumptions and foster a more just society.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1728918
- PAR ID:
- 10545166
- Publisher / Repository:
- SAGE Publications
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Current Directions in Psychological Science
- Volume:
- 29
- Issue:
- 6
- ISSN:
- 0963-7214
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 610-616
- Size(s):
- p. 610-616
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Killen, Melanie; Elenbaas, Laura; Ruck, Martin D. (Ed.)Social inequalities and human rights are inevitably linked to children’s and adolescents’ healthy development. Children who experience structural and interpersonal inequalities in access to resources and opportunities based on their gender, race, ethnicity, or other group categories are denied the right to fair treatment. We assert that investigating the psychological perspectives that children hold regarding inequalities and human rights is necessary for creating fair and just societies. We take a constructivist approach to this topic which seeks to understand how individuals interpret and evaluate observed and experienced inequalities. Even young children think about these issues. Yet, throughout development, individuals must often weigh multiple, potentially conflicting considerations when interpreting, evaluating, and responding to social inequalities and rights violations. In these complex contexts, children and adolescents are neither fully “moral” nor fully “prejudiced.” Rather, critical questions for research in this area concern when, why, and for whom young people reject inequalities and support rights, and, by contrast, when, why, and for whom they accept that inequalities and rights violations should be allowed to persist. This paper provides a brief overview of how different conceptions of social inequalities and rights are intrinsically linked together.more » « less
-
Social inequalities and human rights are inevitably linked to children’s and adolescents’ healthy development. Children who experience structural and interpersonal inequalities in access to resources and opportunities based on their gender, race, ethnicity, or other group categories are denied the right to fair treatment. We assert that investigating the psychological perspectives that children hold regarding inequalities and human rights is necessary for creating fair and just societies. We take a constructivist approach to this topic which seeks to understand how individuals interpret and evaluate observed and experienced inequalities. Even young children think about these issues. Yet, throughout development, individuals must often weigh multiple, potentially conflicting considerations when interpreting, evaluating, and responding to social inequalities and rights violations. In these complex contexts, children and adolescents are neither fully “moral” nor fully “prejudiced.” Rather, critical questions for research in this area concern when, why, and for whom young people reject inequalities and support rights, and, by contrast, when, why, and for whom they accept that inequalities and rights violations should be allowed to persist. This paper provides a brief overview of how different conceptions of social inequalities and rights are intrinsically linked together.more » « less
-
Developmental psychology researchers who investigate the multifaceted nature of prejudice, shown within everyday peer interactions, emphasize the importance of creating inclusive environments for children where equity and justice are promoted. This article uses the Social Reasoning Developmental (SRD) model to explore how children and adolescents reason about social inclusion and exclusion, drawing on moral, social group, and psychological considerations. The role of bystanders in challenging social exclusion is highlighted, with a focus on promoting proactive bystander intervention to create inclusive environments. This review identifies age, group identity, group norms, intergroup contact, empathy, and theory of mind as key influences on children's and adolescents’ bystander reactions. It emphasizes that interventions promoting inclusive peer and school norms, confidence in intergroup contact, empathy, and social perspective-taking can foster inclusive environments and empower bystander action that challenges intergroup social exclusion.more » « less
-
Though adults tend to endorse the stereotype that boys are better than girls in math, children tend to favor their own gender or be gender egalitarian. When do individuals start endorsing the traditional stereotype that boys are better? Using two longitudinal U.S. datasets that span 1993 to 2011, we examined three questions: (1) What are the developmental changes in adolescents’ gender stereotypes about math abilities from early to late adolescence? (2) Do the developmental changes vary based on gender and race/ethnicity? (3) Are adolescents’ stereotypes related to their math motivational beliefs? Finally, (4) do these patterns replicate across two datasets that vary in historical time? Adolescents in grades 8/9 and 11 were asked whether girls or boys are better at math (n’s = 1186 and 23,340, 49–53% girls, 30–54% White, 13–60% Black, 1–22% Latinx, and 2% to 4% Asian). Early adolescents were more likely to be gender egalitarian or favor their own gender. By late adolescence, adolescents’ stereotypes typically shifted towards the traditional stereotype that boys are better. In terms of race/ethnicity, White and Asian adolescents significantly favored boys, whereas Black and Latinx adolescents were more likely to endorse gender egalitarian beliefs. Adolescents’ stereotypes were significantly related to their expectancy beliefs, negatively for girls and positively for boys.more » « less
