Children's use of race and gender as cues to social status

Lower subjective status is associated with reduced satiation and satiety among children and adolescents: A laboratory study

OBJECTIVE

Subjective status represents one's perceptions of their social/socioeconomic standing compared to others. Low subjective status is associated with higher energy intake and body mass, independent of objective status indicators. Low subjective status could be blunting sensations of satiation/satiety, which may spur energy intake. However, there is limited research directly examining the role of subjective status on satiation and satiety, especially in children. We cross-sectionally examined whether subjective socioeconomic status (SSES) and subjective social status (SSS) are independently associated with satiation and satiety. We hypothesized that children/adolescents reporting lower SSES or SSS would report reduced satiation and satiety after energy intake.

METHODS

While fasted, children/adolescents (N = 133, AgeMean = 13.7 ± 3.0 years) consumed a standardized breakfast shake. Participants reported their satiation (difference in pre- and post-shake appetite ratings divided by percentage of shake consumed) and satiety (ratings of hunger across a 90-min period following shake consumption).

RESULTS

Lower SSS was associated with reduced satiation (B = 0.04, 95%CI: 0.0003, 0.08) and both lower SSS and SSES were associated with greater hunger across 90-min (SSS: B = -8.06, 95%CI: 12.94, -4.32; SSES: B = -6.57, 95%CI: 12.35, -1.52). Higher SSES was also associated with lower odds of an unsatiated, yet slowly increasing (OR = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.42, 0.90) or decreasing (OR = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.41, 0.96) hunger trajectory.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower subjective status is associated with reduced satiation and satiety among children/adolescents. Blunting of these sensations in early life may help explain the broader relationships between low subjective status, excess energy intake, and higher body mass, as well as socioeconomic disparities in these outcomes.

Rooting for Their Own Gender: Preschoolers' Selective Preference for Winners

Children's social preferences are influenced by the relative status of other individuals, but also by their social identity and the degree to which those individuals are like them. Previous studies have investigated these aspects separately and showed that in some circumstances children prefer high-status individuals and own-gender individuals. Gender is a particularly interesting case to study because it is a strong dimension of social identity, but also one of the most prevalent forms of social hierarchy, with males conceptualised as superior to females, by adults and children alike. Here we directly asked how children's social preferences are influenced by status (winner or loser of a zero-sum conflict) and winner gender (female or male) in different scenarios (same or mixed-gender). In Experiment 1, children saw same-gender conflicts between two females or two males and they displayed an overall preference for winners. In Experiment 2, participants watched two mixed-gender conflicts, one where the female prevailed and one where the male prevailed. In this case, children chose the winner, but only when they had the same gender as themselves. Experiment 3 confirmed that children preferred own-gender individuals in the absence of conflict or status. Overall, children are sensitive to the relative status of other individuals and use this information to make social decisions. However, preschoolers do not prefer just any individual who wins access to a resource. They preferred dominant individuals, but only when they were of their own gender. This suggests that children's dominance evaluations are modulated by children's social identity.

In the United States, children are more likely than adults to condone discrimination

Discriminatory acts (i.e., harmful acts motivated by the victim's group membership) have outsized consequences for the victim and for society relative to similar harms committed for other reasons. Here, we investigated the development of children's evaluations of discrimination. Specifically, we asked whether children in the U.S., like adults, perceive discriminatory acts as distinctly harmful-that is, more harmful than identical acts that are not motivated by the victim's membership in a particular group. Across 4 studies, we examined children's (N = 588; ages 4-9 years) and adults' (N = 623) perceptions of discriminatory acts versus identical acts motivated by other, personal reasons (Studies 1 and 2). In contrast to adults, children-particularly younger ones-rated the discriminatory acts as least harmful. In addition, whereas adults rated discrimination motivated by the victim's membership in an unfamiliar social category (similar to gender or race) as more harmful than discrimination motivated by membership in an unfamiliar task-based group (a sports team), children did not (Study 3). Finally, both adults and older (but not younger) children rated discrimination against a member of a lower-status (vs. equal-status) group as more harmful (Study 4). These findings advance theory on the development of sociomoral cognition and provide new insight into how children perceive instances of discrimination and bias in their everyday lives.

Children and adolescents rectify unequal allocations of leadership duties in the classroom

Little is known about how children and adolescents evaluate unequal teacher allocations of leadership duties based on ethnicity-race and gender in the classroom. U.S. boys and girls, White (40.7%), Multiracial (18.5%), Black/African American (16.0%), Latine (14.2%), Asian (5.5%), Pacific Islander (0.4%), and other (4.7%) ethnic-racial backgrounds, 8-14 years, N = 275, evaluated teacher allocations of high-status leadership positions favoring specific ethnic-racial or gender groups during 2018-2021. Adolescents, more than children, negatively evaluated unequal teacher allocations of leadership duties that resulted in group-based inequalities, expected peers who shared the identity of a group disadvantaged by the teacher's allocation to view it more negatively than others, and rectified inequalities. Understanding perceptions of teacher-based bias provides an opportunity for interventions designed to create fair and just classrooms that motivate all students to achieve.

Beliefs about social mobility in young American children

Although actual experiences of upward social mobility are historically low, many adolescents and adults express a belief in social mobility (e.g., that social status can change). Although a belief in upward mobility (e.g., that status can improve) can be helpful for economically disadvantaged adolescents and adults, a belief in upward social mobility in adults is also associated with greater acceptance of societal inequality. While this belief might have similar benefits or consequences in children, no previous work has examined whether children are even capable of reasoning about social mobility. This is surprising, given that elementary-aged children exhibit sophisticated reasoning about both social status, as well as about the fixedness or malleability of properties and group membership. Across an economically advantaged group of 5- to 12-year-old American children (N = 151, Mage = 8.91, 63% racial majority, 25% racially marginalized; Mhousehold income = $133,064), we found evidence that children can reason about social mobility for their own families and for others. Similar to research in adults, children believe that others are more likely to experience upward than downward mobility. However, in contrast to adult's typical beliefs-but in line with economic realities-between 7- and 9-years-old, children become less likely to expect upward mobility for economically disadvantaged, versus advantaged, families. In sum, children are capable of reasoning about social mobility in nuanced ways; future work should explore the implications of these beliefs. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: Despite harsh economic realities, a belief in upward social mobility and the American Dream is alive and well. Between 7 and 9 years of age, economically advantaged, American children begin to expect economically disadvantaged families to experience less upward mobility than economically advantaged families. Children's beliefs about social mobility better accord with reality than adults' do.

Gender stereotypes regarding power and niceness in Japanese children

Belief in gendered social power imbalance (i.e. males are more powerful than females) leads to undesirable gender disparities, but little is known about the developmental origins of this belief, especially in Eastern cultures. We investigated the development onset of this belief by focusing on 4-7-year-old Japanese children while considering another belief (females are nicer than males) for comparison. In the dyadic context tasks, children saw pairs of animated characters depicting powerful-powerless or kind-unkind postures and judged the characters' gender (boy or girl). Results suggested both 'nice = female' and 'powerful = female' gender stereotypes in children. In the collective context tasks, children were presented with stories in occupational contexts, including multiple unspecified people and verbal cues, describing more explicitly the powerful and nice traits of the protagonists. The results replicated the 'nice = female' gender stereotype. Moreover, early 'powerful = male' gender stereotypes were seen in 6-year-old boys but not among girls in general. These findings demonstrate that Japanese children's beliefs regarding gender differences in power vary depending on the context in which male-female interactions are presented. Additionally, the study reveals that signs of the 'powerful = male' social power gender stereotype emerge around the age of 6.

Children think differently from adults when reasoning about resources acquired from parents

Although sharing is often considered a virtuous behavior, individuals rarely share all their extra resources with those less fortunate. The current research investigated conditions under which children believe that someone who has more resources deserves to keep them rather than address an inequality. Specifically, we contrasted resources acquired via merit, windfall, and parental allocations. Across two studies, we showed 5- and 6-year-old children (n = 59), 8- and 9-year-old children (n = 120), and adults (n = 163) three scenarios in which one person acquired more resources than the other due to luck, due to merit, or because that person's parents gave him or her more, and we asked whether that person should share these resources or keep all of them. Results suggested that adults differentiated both the family resource and the merit conditions from the windfall allocation, believing that an agent deserves to keep the extra resources more when they are acquired through one's family or due to merit. However, children did not differentiate family resources from windfall, although they were more likely to believe that individuals deserve to keep their extra resources when they were acquired through merit. The type of the resource (i.e., money vs. balls) did not affect participants' sharing decisions. Overall, these findings suggest that over development the resources acquired from one's family come to be seen as more deserved than windfall resources.

How can white parents raise anti-racist children? Introducing the routes to effective anti-racist parenting (REAP) model

In response to highly publicized instances of overt racial injustice, there has been a recent resurgence of interest and commitment to identifying processes through which anti-racist behaviors develop among White individuals. One particularly important context in which anti-racist behaviors can develop is within families and as a result of childrearing. Theories of anti-racism typically neglect the role of families and family science research typically neglects a focus on anti-racist parenting outcomes. To further research and applied work on fostering anti-racism within White families, this paper introduces a new integrative model called routes to effective anti-racist parenting (REAP). The model draws on theories from various fields, including family science and social psychology, and uses a metaphor of nurturing a plant to explain the nuanced, multi-faceted approaches to anti-racist parenting. The model incorporates factors related to the "pot" (i.e., fundamental values and structure necessary to contain more specific anti-racist skills and behaviors), "soil" (i.e., characteristics that define anti-racist commitment), "seeds" (i.e., direct transmission of anti-racism skills), and "environment" (i.e., influential external factors). Finally, we describe the intended benefits that can be reaped from this intentional approach to anti-racist parenting. The REAP model contributes to the family science literature by providing an empirically grounded theoretical model describing the roles that parents can play in children's anti-racist development.

Racial categorization and intergroup perception in preschool children: A focus on group membership and group size in the French context

In the current study, we explored how context influences intergroup perception in 3- to 6-year-old children (N = 242; Mage = 55.5 months, SD = 9.94) in France. We examined the impact of participants' group membership (belonging to a high- vs. low-social-status group) and their group size on the development of racial categorization and the perception of cultural distance. Children completed two tasks using photographs depicting children from the three most represented racial groups in France: Caucasians, Black Africans, and North Africans. In the first task, the free categorization task, they were asked to group photographs of children they thought belonged together. Results revealed that as children grew older, they increasingly grouped children based on their race. In addition, high-social-status (nonmarginalized) children categorized more based on race than low-social-status children. In a second task, children were requested to rate the same photographs on a 5-point Likert scale for perceived cultural distance in three criteria: music, eating habits, and language. Results showed that regardless of their own group membership, children perceived photos representing children of color (North and Black Africans) as culturally more distant than White children on all criteria. However, this bias was not observed in schools where groups have equal numerical status, suggesting a positive impact of environments where groups are numerically equal.

Teachers' Beliefs, Values, and Likelihood of Talking about Group-Based Discrimination

A teacher survey (N = 290) based on the social reasoning developmental model investigated (1) beliefs and values about using class time for discussing discrimination and reported frequency of discussing discrimination based on different social identities and (2) factors predicting teachers' frequency for discussing racial discrimination in the classroom. Most participants reported beliefs that all five identities were worth discussing in class, yet teachers most strongly believed that wealth, race, and native language affect students' education. Higher beliefs that prejudice can change, school support, and beliefs that race affects students' education predicted higher teacher reports for talking about racial discrimination.

Children can represent complex social status hierarchies: Evidence from Indonesia

Children's ethnicity-status associations are often studied in societies where one ethnic group possesses status across multiple dimensions, such as political influence and wealth. This study examined children's (6-12 years) and adults' representations of more complex hierarchies in Indonesia (N = 341; 38% Native Indonesian, 33% Chinese Indonesian, and 27% other ethnicities; 55% female, 36% male; 2021-2022), a society where ethnic groups hold distinct forms of status (on average, Native Indonesians have political influence; Chinese Indonesians have wealth). By 6.5 years, children associated Native Indonesians with political influence and Chinese Indonesians with wealth. Intersectional analyses indicated that ethnicity-status associations were stronger for male than female targets. Children of all ethnicities preferred Chinese Indonesians and preferences were predicted by wealth judgments.

Do American children automatically encode cues to wealth?

As adults, we readily notice markers of social status and wealth and draw conclusions about individuals based on these cues. Do children do the same? Using a "Who Said What?" task across 5- to 9-year-old American children (n = 159; Mage = 7.44 years; 51.6% female, 47.2% male, 1.2% nonconforming or not provided; 59.1% White, 23.3% racial-ethnic minority, 17.6% not provided) and adults (n = 182; 84.1% female, 13.7% male, 2.2% nonconforming or not provided; 54.9% White, 44.5% racial-ethnic minority, 0.6% not provided), we found that both children and adults automatically encode (i.e., spontaneously notice and remember) occupational cues (i.e., work attire) and quantitative cues (i.e., amount of money) to wealth but that only adults automatically encode qualitative cues to wealth (i.e., car quality), suggesting developmental changes in which types of cues to wealth are most salient. Furthermore, automatic encoding in children was sensitive to contextual factors; children from communities with less affluence and higher rates of unemployment were more likely to encode some wealth cues than their peers from more affluent and employed communities. Finally, from 5 to 7 years of age, children began to draw connections between wealth cues, using occupational cues to make inferences about the quantity and quality of others' possessions. This research highlights the changing salience of wealth cues across development and suggests that even young children are likely to notice economic inequality and thus to be ready for conversations about inequality, as well as the origins of inequality, at an earlier age than previously supposed.

Children perpetuate competence-based inequality when they help peers

Exchanges of help between children are common and often have positive consequences. But not all help is equally beneficial, for example because some help does not provide an opportunity to practice and develop skills. Here I examine whether young children might perpetuate competence-based inequality by providing incompetent peers with less opportunity to practice and improve their skills compared to competent peers. Study 1 (N = 253, 6-9 years) shows that young children understand not all help is equally beneficial: Children think that peers who receive empowerment (hints) vs. non-empowerment (correct answers) help can learn more. Study 2 (N = 80) and 3 (N = 41) then assessed children's (7-9 years) actual helping behavior in a lab-based experiment. Through a cover story, participants were introduced to two unknown, same-age children whom they later overheard were either good or not good at solving puzzles (Study 2) or math (Study 3). Subsequently, participants got to help both of them with a puzzle-quiz (Study 2) or a math-quiz (Study 3) by providing either empowerment or non-empowerment when they asked for help. Across both studies, children were more likely to provide empowerment help to competent peers, and non-empowerment help to incompetent peers. This work suggests that when young children perceive differences in competence (e.g., based on stereotypes), they contribute to maintaining the status quo by providing the most vulnerable students, that would profit the most from improving their skills, less opportunity to do so.

Thinking Structurally: A Cognitive Framework for Understanding How People Attribute Inequality to Structural Causes

To make accurate causal inferences about social-group inequalities, people must consider structural causes. Structural causes are a distinct type of extrinsic cause-they are stable, interconnected societal forces that systematically advantage some social groups and disadvantage others. We propose a new cognitive framework to specify how people attribute inequality to structural causes. This framework is rooted in counterfactual theories of causal judgment and suggests that people will recognize structural factors as causal when they are perceived as "difference-making" for inequality above and beyond any intrinsic causes. Building on this foundation, our framework makes the following contributions. First, we propose specific types of evidence that support difference-making inferences about structural factors: within-group change (i.e., observing that disadvantaged groups' outcomes improve under better societal conditions) and well-matched between-group comparisons (i.e., observing that advantaged group members, who have similar baseline traits to the disadvantaged group, experience more favorable societal conditions and life outcomes). Second, we consider contextual, cognitive, and motivational barriers that may complicate the availability and acceptance of this evidence. We conclude by exploring how the framework might be applied in future research examining people's causal inferences about inequality.

Developmental risk sensitivity theory: the effects of socio-economic status on children's risky gain and loss decisions

Evolutionary developmental theories propose that early environments shape human risk preferences. Developmental risk sensitivity theory (D-RST) focuses on the plasticity of risk preferences during childhood and makes predictions about the effect of reward size based on a child's social environment. By contrast, prospect theory predicts risk aversion for gains and risk seeking for losses regardless of environment or status. We presented 4 to 10-year-olds (n = 194) with a set of trials in which they chose between a certain amount and a chance to receive more or nothing. Two trials were equal expected value choices that differed by stake size and two were unequal expected value choices. Children either received gain trials or loss trials. Social environment was assessed using socio-economic status (SES) and subjective social status. Results confirmed the predictions of D-RST for gains based on SES. Children from lower-SES families differentiated between the high- and low-value trials and made more risky decisions for the high-value reward compared with higher-SES children. Children from higher-SES families were more risk averse for both trial types. Decisions for loss trials did not conform completely to either theory. We discuss the results in relation to evolutionary developmental theories.

Construal level mindsets modulate gender categorizations in preschool children

Social categorization is a crucial information processing strategy that adults deliberately adjust depending on goals and situational requirements. This study investigated whether flexibility in categorization is similarly present among preschool children. More specifically, we tested whether spontaneous gender categorizations are more pronounced for children with a situationally induced abstract compared to concrete construal level mindset. Sixty-one children first participated in a construal mindset induction task before completing a visual variant of the "who said what" memory task. Systematic memory confusions indicated that all children engaged in gender-based social categorization but that this tendency was accentuated in the abstract compared to concrete mindset condition. These results suggest an ability of children to modulate social categorizations. Implications for the development of intergroup biases are discussed.

Intuitive Sociology: Children Recognize Decision-Making Structures and Prefer Groups With Less-Concentrated Power

From an early age, children recognize that people belong to social groups. However, not all groups are structured in the same way. The current study asked whether children recognize and distinguish among different decision-making structures. If so, do they prefer some decision-making structures over others? In these studies, children were told stories about two groups that went camping. In the hierarchical group, one character made all the decisions; in the egalitarian group, each group member made one decision. Without being given explicit information about the group's structures, 6- to 8-year-old children, but not 4- and 5-year-old children, recognized that the two groups had different decision-making structures and preferred to interact with the group where decision-making was shared. Children also inferred that a new member of the egalitarian group would be more generous than a new member of the hierarchical group. Thus, from an early age, children's social reasoning includes the ability to compare social structures, which may be foundational for later complex political and moral reasoning.

Children's thinking about group-based social hierarchies

Wealth, power, and status are distributed unevenly across social groups. A surge of recent research reveals that people being recognizing, representing, and reasoning about group-based patterns of inequity during the first years of life. We first synthesize recent research on what children learn about group-based social hierarchies as well as how this learning occurs. We then discuss how children not only learn about societal structures but become active participants in them. Studying the origins and development of children's thoughts and behavior regarding group-based social hierarchies provides valuable insight into how systems of inequity are perpetuated across generations and how intergroup biases related to wealth, power, and status may be mitigated and reshaped early in development.

Integrating Objective and Subjective Social Class to Advance Our Understanding of Externalizing Problem Behavior in Children and Adolescents: A Conceptual Review and Model

Extant research has identified both objective measures of socioeconomic status (SES) and subjective social class (SSC) as important predictors of psychosocial outcomes in childhood and adolescence, particularly with regard to externalizing symptoms. Given the importance of the associations with SES and SSC, a more nuanced and integrated conceptual understanding of early pathways of vulnerability implicated in the development and maintenance of youth externalizing problems is warranted. Thus, this review will: (1) operationalize both SES and SSC and their current standards of measurement; (2) examine current literature describing their respective associations with a range of externalizing symptoms in both children and adolescents; (3) review current theoretical models connecting SES and SSC and youth development and the strengths and limitations of those approaches; (4) propose a new conceptual socioecological model situating the impact of SES and SSC on youth externalizing problems in the context of parents and peers as a framework to further integrate existing research and guide future work; and (5) discuss potential clinical implications at the intersection of this work.

"This kid looks like he has everything": 3- to 11-year-old children's concerns for fairness and social preferences when peers differ in social class and race

This study investigated 3- to 11-year-old US children's (N = 348) perceptions of access to resources, social group preferences, and resource distribution decisions and reasoning when hypothetical peers differed in social class (poor or rich) and race (Black or White). Data were collected in 2019. The sample reflected the region where data were collected in terms of gender (44% girls, 30% boys, 1% another identity) and race and ethnicity (46% White, 10% multiracial or multiethnic, 9% Black, 5% Latinx, 2% Asian, 3% another identity), and parents reported a higher average level of education than the regional average. Results revealed both marked age differences in children's perceptions, preferences, decisions, and reasoning and specific combinations of peer group memberships that were especially likely to receive preferential treatment. With age, children perceived that rich peers had greater access to resources than poor peers, but when both peers were poor, White peers were perceived to have more resources than Black peers. Social group preferences changed with age, from mixed social class and racial group preferences, to preferences for rich peers, to dislike for rich peers. Resource allocation decisions and reasoning reflected both social group and fairness concerns: young children distributed more to White peers especially if they were also rich, participants in middle childhood explicitly favored rich peers regardless of their race, and older children distributed more to poor peers and reasoned about either moral concerns for equity or social class stereotypes. Thus, overall, younger children's responses often reflected broader economic and racial inequalities while older children often sought to create more equity, though not always for moral reasons.

Children use race to infer who is "in charge"

Children must navigate multifaceted social hierarchies to make sense of the social world. Whereas race and social status covary in many societies, minimal research has examined whether children use race as a status marker. Across three studies, we asked 3- to 11-year-old American children (N = 646) to determine which of two models was "in charge" while varying the models' race and posture cues. When the cue of race was presented individually (Study 1), children used it to derive their status inferences. That is, they expected a White model to more likely be "in charge" than a Black model. However, when the cue of race was presented in conjunction with conflicting posture cues (Study 3), children relied more heavily on posture to determine who was in "in charge." Thus, whereas children have learned the association between White and higher status from their community, they understand that other cues may be more indicative of social status.

Early presence of a "power = males" association: Girls link power to their gender less often than boys but can be as motivated to gain it

In three studies, it was tested whether children (N = 184; aged 6-10 years, White, mid- to high income) from a U.S. midwestern city used other individuals' gender and race to predict who is in charge and the means by which power is gained (Study 1) and whether children's own gender predicted their assignments of positions of authority (Study 2A) and pursuits of positions of authority (Study 2B). When asked to predict who was in charge at different workplaces, with age White children decreased their race-based, power-related favoritism; children were increasingly likely with age to link White adults to rather questionable routes to power as well as Black adults with meritorious reasons for gaining power (Study 1). In addition, boys (but not girls) systematically associated power with adult workers of their own gender and did so regardless of whether or not power had been obtained meritoriously (Study 1). Nonetheless, when given the option to assign an authority role (Study 2A) or assume an authority role (Study 2B), boys and girls exhibited comparable levels of in-group and self-biases.

How White American Children Develop Racial Biases in Emotion Reasoning

For decades, affective scientists have examined how adults and children reason about others' emotions. Yet, our knowledge is limited regarding how emotion reasoning is impacted by race-that is, how individuals reason about emotions displayed by people of other racial groups. In this review, we examine the developmental origins of racial biases in emotion reasoning, focusing on how White Americans reason about emotions displayed by Black faces/people. We highlight how racial biases in emotion reasoning, which emerge as early as infancy, likely contribute to miscommunications, inaccurate social perceptions, and negative interracial interactions across the lifespan. We conclude by discussing promising interventions to reduce these biases as well as future research directions, highlighting how affective scientists can decenter Whiteness in their research designs. Together, this review highlights how emotion reasoning is a potentially affective component of racial bias among White Americans.

Promoting Fair and Just School Environments: Developing Inclusive Youth

Incidents of prejudice and discrimination in K-12 schools have increased over the past decade around the world, including the U.S. In 2018, more than two-thirds of the 2,776 U.S. educators surveyed reported witnessing a hate or bias incident in their school. Children and adolescents who experience prejudice, social exclusion and discrimination are subject to compromised well-being and low academic achievement. Few educators feel prepared to incorporate this topic into the education curriculum. Given the long-term harm related to experiencing social exclusion and discrimination, school districts need to create positive school environments and directly address prejudice and bias. Several factors are currently undermining progress in this area. First, national debates in the U.S. and other countries has politicized the topic of creating fair and just school environments. Second, the Covid pandemic has interrupted children's and adolescents' education by halting academic progress which has particularly negatively affected students from marginalized and ethnic/racial minority backgrounds. Third, teachers have experienced significant stress during Covid-19 with an increase in anxiety around virtual instruction and communication with parents. Three strategies recommended to address these converging problems include creating inclusive and non-discriminatory policies for schools, promoting opportunities for intergroup contact and mutual respect, and implementing evidence-based, developmentally appropriate education programs designed to reduce prejudice, increase ethnic and racial identity, and promote equity, fairness and justice in school environments.

Socioeconomic status predicts children's moral judgments of novel resource distributions

Children's moral judgments of resource distributions as having "fair" or "unfair" origins play an important role in early social cognition. What factors shape these judgments? The present study advances research on this question in two primary ways: First, while prior work has typically assigned children to an advantaged or disadvantaged position in an experimental setting, here we also investigated how relative objective and subjective socioeconomic status (OSS and SSS) predicted children's judgments. Second, while prior work has asked children to judge distributions with known origins, here we presented children with novel and causally-ambiguous distributions, thereby simulating children's initial encounter of resource distributions in the social world. We assessed participants' (n = 113 6- to 9-year-olds) OSS and SSS and then introduced them to a machine that distributed Skittles on an unknown basis. Participants received half as many, twice as many, or the same number of Skittles as a peer in three between-subjects conditions, and then rated the machine's fairness. Results revealed that children who rated their families as wealthier relative to their neighborhoods (higher SSS) rated the machine as more fair. However, children from families that were actually wealthier relative to their neighborhoods (higher OSS) were more likely to rate the disadvantage-giving machine as unfair. Together, results represent the first evidence that objective and subjective socioeconomic status shape children's moral judgments of resource distributions, consistent with evidence that these two forms of socioeconomic status have unique impacts on adults' judgments of inequality. Implications for moral and social development are discussed. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Leadership, gender, and colorism: Children in India use social category information to guide leadership cognition

Across the globe, women and racial minorities are underrepresented in leadership. We examined the development of 5-10-year-old children's leadership cognition in India, the world's largest democracy. This cultural context offered the opportunity to study the development of attitudes about gender and to extend examinations of children's conceptions of race to include colorism (the privileging of lighter skin). In Experiment 1, children completed a novel Election Task in which they saw a fictional class with 20 students varying in gender (boys, girls) and race/skin tone (darker-skinned South Asian [Dark-SA], lighter-skinned South Asian [Light-SA], Black, White). Children predicted who would be elected as President, Treasurer, Welcomer, and Notetaker. Children most often chose Light-SA and White students as President. When choosing Presidents, younger children showed an own-gender bias, but by age 9, both boys and girls primarily chose boy Presidents. Importantly, children's choices differed for the other class positions. Next, we asked children to draw a "leader." No boys drew a girl, and girls' drawings were mixed (52% drew girls). In Experiment 2, we replicated the drawing task findings and compared children's drawings of a leader to their drawings of a helper and a scientist. Children most often drew boys and men as leaders and scientists, but not as helpers, suggesting specificity of children's pro-male bias to male-stereotyped positions. Children's conceptions of leadership reflected a male bias and an association between lighter skin and status. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

White Parents' Socialization of Racial Attitudes: A Commentary on Scott et al. (2020)

In the September 2020 issue of Perspectives, Scott et al. argued that there is insufficient empirical work on White parents' racial-socialization strategies to support generalizations about the topic and, therefore, that journalists' recommendation that White parents discuss race and racism with their children represents a case of speculation without evidence. Although we strongly support Scott et al.'s call for additional, rigorous research on racial socialization in White families, we argue that their critique of popular-press pieces was unwarranted. Specifically, we argue that, although definitive tests of the effects of specific White parental racial-socialization strategies are lacking, the recommendation for parents to discuss race and racism with their children is both appropriate and empirically grounded. We describe research on racial socialization, intergroup contact, and cognitive development that is consistent with recommendations from developmental scientists reported in the popular press. Furthermore, we argue that parents may be the ideal socializers of racial attitudes. We conclude with a discussion of the broad context concerning media reports of findings from psychological science.

Racial Categorization and Intergroup Relations in Children: The Role of Social Status and Numerical Group Size

The aim of this review was to examine the effect of social and numerical group size on racial categorization and intergroup relations in children. We first described the development of racial categorization and the factors that increase the saliency of the race criterion in different contexts. Then, we examine the role of social status in intergroups relations and show that low status children express lower ingroup favoritism compared to their peers from high status groups. Few studies investigated the role of ingroup size on intergroup biases. Here, we look at this numerical variable through the proportion of children of different racial groups in the school environment. The results show that homogeneous environments contribute to the decrease of bias and negative attitudes. We discuss how identifying specific and interactive effects of the social and numerical group size would allow us to implement early and efficient intervention programs.

Verbally Highlighting Extrinsic Causes of Novel Social Disparities Helps Children View Low-Status Groups as Structurally Disadvantaged Rather Than Personally Inferior

As part of their “essentialist” intuitions, young children tend to form personal attributions for observed intergroup differences – attributing them to groups’ intrinsic natures or inborn characteristics. Much research has linked this essentialist view of social groups with prejudiced attitudes. However, less research has explored children’s capacity to form structural attributions for observed intergroup differences – attributing them to groups’ extrinsic circumstances or access to opportunities – or how structural attributions relate to social attitudes. Structural attributions could enable children to view low-status groups as extrinsically disadvantaged rather than intrinsically inferior. We were interested in whether verbally highlighting the extrinsic causes of novel social status disparities could support young children in forming structural attributions for them, thereby mitigating the formation of prejudice toward novel low-status groups. To investigate, we introduced participants (n=106 5- and 6-year olds) to novel social status disparities that could be attributed to either intrinsic or extrinsic causes, and we framed the disparities in either intrinsic, neutral, or extrinsic terms. We then assessed children’s attributions for the disparities (through two measures: explanations and interventions) and their social attitudes toward the groups (through two measures: friendship preferences and prize allocations). Results indicated that participants tended to provide mostly personal attributions overall but that extrinsic framing led them to provide significantly more structural attributions. Extrinsic framing did not significantly impact social attitudes overall, but exploratory analyses revealed that it impacted participants’ friendship preferences in particular. Together, results suggest that verbally highlighting extrinsic causes can disrupt children’s intuitive tendency toward personal attributions, with promising implications for their views of low-status groups.

Small groups lead, big groups control: Perceptions of numerical group size, power, and status across development

Participants (N = 384 three- to ten-year-olds; 51% girls, 49% boys; 73% White, 18% multiracial/other, 5% Asian, and 3% Black; N = 610 adults) saw depictions of 20 individuals split into two social groups (1:19; 2:18; 5:15; or 8:12 per group) and selected which group was "in charge" (Experiment 1), "the leader" (Experiment 2), or likely to "get the stuff" (resources) in a conflict (Experiment 3). Whereas participants across ages predicted the larger group would "get the stuff," a tendency to view smaller groups as "in charge" and "the leader" strengthened with age and when the smaller group was rarer. These findings suggest the perceived relation between numerical group size and hierarchy is flexible and inform theory regarding the developmental trajectories of reasoning about power and status.

Cross-cultural asymmetries in oculomotor interference elicited by gaze distractors belonging to Asian and White faces

The averted gaze of others triggers reflexive attentional orienting in the corresponding direction. This phenomenon can be modulated by many social factors. Here, we used an eye-tracking technique to investigate the role of ethnic membership in a cross-cultural oculomotor interference study. Chinese and Italian participants were required to perform a saccade whose direction might be either congruent or incongruent with the averted-gaze of task-irrelevant faces belonging to Asian and White individuals. The results showed that, for Chinese participants, White faces elicited a larger oculomotor interference than Asian faces. By contrast, Italian participants exhibited a similar oculomotor interference effect for both Asian and White faces. Hence, Chinese participants found it more difficult to suppress eye-gaze processing of White rather than Asian faces. The findings provide converging evidence that social attention can be modulated by social factors characterizing both the face stimulus and the participants. The data are discussed with reference to possible cross-cultural differences in perceived social status.

Beliefs about social norms and racial inequalities predict variation in the early development of racial bias

Racism remains a pervasive force around the world with widespread and well documented harmful consequences for members of marginalized racial groups. The psychological biases that maintain structural and interpersonal racism begin to emerge in early childhood, but with considerable individual variation-some children develop more racial bias than others. The present study (N = 116; 4-year-old children) provides novel insights into the developmental mechanisms underlying the emergence of racial bias by longitudinally documenting how two psychological processes-normative beliefs about interracial friendships and explanatory beliefs about racial inequalities-developmentally predict the emergence of pro-White/anti-Black racial bias during early childhood. In a 6-month, three-wave, longitudinal study, we found that 4-year-old children's beliefs that their parents and peers do not value interracial friendships predicted increased racial bias in and across time and that children's endorsement of essentialist over extrinsic explanations for racial inequalities predicted the developmental trajectory of racial bias over time. These findings suggest that children's foundational beliefs about the social world developmentally predict the emergence of racial bias in early childhood and speak to the importance of early and persistent intervention efforts targeting children's normative beliefs about interracial friendships and explanatory beliefs about racial inequalities.

Turn the Page, Speech-Language Pathologists: Adequate, Authentic, and Accurate Representation as a Consideration in the Selection of Picture Books for Use in Treatment

Purpose This tutorial discusses what it means to be a culturally responsive speech-language pathologist (SLP) and then grounds this discussion in strategies that SLPs can engage in to diversify the books and other materials that they use in clinical practice. Method We motivate the tutorial by reviewing policy statements and theoretical information from allied literature. Then, we suggest some ways that SLPs can reflect on their practice to enact an antiracist/culturally responsive approach to treatment, taking the selection of children's literature up as a particular example. We identified strategies that have been suggested across a variety of fields and illustrate these strategies with examples. We both provide recommendations for how to select picture books and also suggest ways to implement these suggestions with accountability. Conclusions There is a need for SLPs to reflect on how to be culturally responsive in their practice and to review their materials selection practices with regard to how materials reflect the composition of their caseloads. As a predominantly White profession serving diverse caseloads, we have an ethical obligation to review our choice of materials and align them with culturally responsive practices.

Social sampling: Children track social choices to reason about status hierarchies

We tested whether preschool-aged children (N = 280) track an agents' choices of individuals from novel social groups (i.e., social choices) to infer an agent's social preferences and the social status of the groups. Across experiments, children saw a box containing 2 groups (red and blue toy cats). In Experiment 1, children were randomly assigned to Social Selection in which items were described as "friends," or to Object Selection in which items were described as "toys." Within each selection type, the agent selected 5 items from either a numerically common group (82% of box; selections appearing random) or a numerically rare group (18% of box; selections violating random sampling). After watching these selections, children were asked who the agent would play with among 3 individuals: 1 from the selected group, 1 from the unselected group, or 1 from a novel group. Only participants who viewed Social Selection of a numerically rare group predicted that the agent would select an individual from that group in the future. These participants also said an individual from the selected group was the "leader." Subsequent experiments further probed the Social Selection findings. Children's reasoning depended on the agent actively selecting the friends (Experiment 2), and children thought a member of the rare selected group was the leader, but not the "helper" (Experiment 3). These results illustrate that children track an agent's positive social choices to reason about that agent's social preferences and to infer the status (likelihood of being a leader) of novel social groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Why do children show racial biases in their resource allocation decisions?

Young children often prefer people high in status and with access to resources. Children also favor fairness and equality, especially when it comes to sharing. Two studies examined how children (N = 185; age range = 4.0-6.9 years, M_age = 5.49 years; 45% White, 12% Asian, 11% Black, 7% Hispanic, 24% other or undisclosed) reconcile these conflicting preferences by investigating the relation between children's social preferences and resource allocations to White and Black children. Race provides an important case to examine how children resolve this conflict given that children show preferences for stereotypically high-status (White) people but also show awareness of systemic racial inequality that disadvantages Black people. In a costly sharing resource allocation task (i.e., Dictator Game) where participants were asked how much of a limited resource they wanted to share with a Black child and a White child, Study 1 revealed that participants sometimes chose to share more with a White child compared with a Black child but that biased giving was unrelated to children's biased feelings of warmth toward White children. Study 2 confirmed that biased giving was unrelated to children's feelings of warmth and instead implicated children's beliefs about race and wealth; children who expected White people to have more wealth showed more pro-White bias in their giving behavior. Together, these results suggest that cultural stereotypes about wealth might shape children's economic decision making in a way that perpetuates disadvantage, but they also indicate that the processes underlying resource allocation decisions warrant further study.

The Development of Social Categorization

Social categorization is a universal mechanism for making sense of a vast social world with roots in perceptual, conceptual, and social systems. These systems emerge strikingly early in life and undergo important developmental changes across childhood. The development of social categorization entails identifying which ways of classifying people are culturally meaningful, how these categories might be used to predict, explain, and evaluate the behavior of other people, and how one's own identity relates to these systems of categorization and representation. Social categorization can help children simplify and understand their social environment but has detrimental consequences in the forms of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. Thus, understanding how social categorization develops is a central problem for the cognitive, social, and developmental sciences. This review details the multiple developmental processes that underlie this core psychological capacity.