Science resource inequalities viewed as less wrong when girls are disadvantaged

Children's evaluations of direct and indirect bias justifications for same-race inclusion

Different forms of prejudice emerge in childhood, often referred to as direct and indirect bias. Little is known about children's evaluations of whether certain forms of bias are more okay than others, particularly in the context of peer and parental messages about interracial social inclusion. To address this gap, the current study investigated how Black and White American children aged 6 to 12 years (N = 219; Mage = 9.18 years, SD = 1.90; 51% female) evaluate vignettes in which a Black or White peer opted to include a same-race peer due to indirect bias (preferences for in-group similarity) or direct bias (expressions of out-group dislike). Data were collected in 2021 and 2022. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to expressions of out-group dislike more negatively than same-race inclusion due to in-group similarity preference. They also evaluated same-race inclusion due to a preference for in-group similarity stated by peers more negatively than when stated by parents. Children evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference more positively when the child who included a same-race peer was Black than when the child who included a same-race peer was White. Participants who negatively evaluated same-race inclusion due to parental preference were more likely to use moral reasoning to justify their evaluations, whereas participants who positively evaluated this inclusion were more likely to use non-moral reasoning. This study revealed novel insights about how Black and White American children evaluate forms of direct and indirect bias as justifications for same-race inclusion and how their reasoning relates to their evaluations.

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's and adolescents' evaluations of wealth-related STEM inequality

The fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) are rife with inequalities and under-representation that have their roots in childhood. While researchers have focused on gender and race/ethnicity as two key dimensions of inequality, less attention has been paid to wealth. To this end, and drawing from the Social Reasoning Development approach, we examined children's and adolescents' perceptions of STEM ability and access to opportunities as a function of wealth, as well as their desire to rectify such inequalities. Participants (n = 234: early childhood, n = 70, mean age = 6.33, SD = .79; middle childhood, n = 92, mean age = 8.90, SD = .83 and early adolescence, n = 62, mean age = 12.00; SD = 1.16) in the U.K. (64% White British) and U.S. (40% White/European American) read about two characters, one high-wealth and one low-wealth. In early childhood, participants reported that the high-wealth character would have greater STEM ability and were just as likely to invite either character to take part in a STEM opportunity. By middle childhood, participants were more likely to report equal STEM abilities for both characters and to seek to rectify inequalities by inviting the low-wealth character to take part in a STEM opportunity. However, older participants reported that peers would still prefer to invite the high-wealth character. These findings also varied by ethnic group status, with minority status participants rectifying inequalities at a younger age than majority status participants. Together these findings document that children are aware of STEM inequalities based on wealth and, with age, will increasingly seek to rectify these inequalities.