How social status psychologically shapes racial bias in children

Recent analysis of psychological literature indicates that racial bias in childhood is driven by more than just a preference for those who look similar to oneself. A review of existing research suggests that children’s observations of social hierarchies and wealth disparities play a primary role in shaping their racial attitudes. Children as young as three years old associate high social status with positive traits, often leading them to favor White individuals over people of color in societies marked by inequality. The paper was published in the journal Social and Personality Psychology Compass.

Researchers have documented for decades that children develop racial biases early in life. A common pattern observed in social development is “in-group preference,” where individuals prefer members of their own social category. This pattern holds true for categories like gender, where boys tend to prefer boys and girls tend to prefer girls.

However, the pattern becomes inconsistent when researchers examine race. White children in the United States typically demonstrate a strong preference for other White children. In contrast, children of color frequently do not show this same level of preference for their own group.

Some studies show that children of color may even display a preference for White people over members of their own racial background. Amber D. Williams and Xinguo Zhang, researchers at the University of Washington, sought to understand the reasons behind this discrepancy. They proposed that the variation in bias is partially explained by how children perceive and process social status.

Social status is defined by an individual or group possessing greater access to resources, power, or influence. In the United States, historical systems have created a reality where White people generally hold more wealth and political power than Black people. Williams and Zhang examined how children’s awareness of these disparities interacts with their developing cognitive abilities.

The authors began by reviewing the historical context that created the status differences children observe. They noted that centuries of slavery, followed by segregation and discriminatory housing policies, established a persistent wealth gap between Black and White Americans. These structural factors result in disparities that are visible in daily life.

Children are keen observers of their environments. The review highlights research showing that children recognize indicators of social status by age three or four. These indicators include physical size, the possession of new or branded clothing, and decision-making power.

Once children identify who holds high status, they tend to form specific social preferences. The researchers found a robust body of evidence showing that young children prefer to befriend high-status individuals. Children also predict that high-status people possess positive personality traits, such as generosity and competence.

This preference for status appears to transfer to racial groups. Because children frequently observe White people in positions of higher status compared to Black people, they often extend their status-based preference to the racial group as a whole. This helps explain why White children show strong in-group bias, as their racial identity aligns with the high-status group.

It also explains why children of color may show out-group preference. They are navigating a conflict between their own identity and a social environment that signals that the out-group possesses more value or resources. The researchers identified several cognitive mechanisms that reinforce this link between status and racial bias.

One such mechanism is known as “affective tagging.” This process involves the automatic association of positive feelings with individuals who experience positive outcomes. Research shows that children prefer people who are lucky over those who are unlucky, even when the outcome is entirely random.

This mental association is “sticky” and difficult to reverse. When children see a group with more resources, they “tag” that group with positive affect. This occurs regardless of how the resources were acquired.

Another cognitive factor is the “inherence heuristic.” This is a mental shortcut that leads humans to attribute patterns they observe to the inherent traits of the people involved. When children see inequality, they rarely assume it is caused by external forces like history or luck.

Instead, children tend to assume that the wealthier group is inherently smarter, harder working, or better in some way. The review cites studies where children attributed wealth differences to individual abilities rather than inheritance or luck. This internal attribution makes the inequality seem fair and justified in the child’s mind.

The concept of “social essentialism” further cements these views. Essentialism is the belief that social categories like race are based on deep, biological differences that determine a person’s nature. While race is actually a social construct, many children and adults view it as a biological reality.

When children view race as an essential trait, they are more likely to believe that the status differences they see are natural and unchangeable. The authors note that this belief system predicts stronger negative attitudes toward lower-status groups. It creates a logic where biological differences explain why one group has more than another.

The review also emphasizes the role of socialization. Children do not develop these ideas in a vacuum. The messages they receive from parents and their broader culture shape how they interpret inequality.

When adults explain inequality through the lens of meritocracy—suggesting that people have what they earn through hard work—it reinforces the inherence heuristic. It implies that those with less simply did not work hard enough. Conversely, explaining the structural or unfair reasons for inequality can reduce bias.

The authors point to research demonstrating that children’s attitudes shift when they are taught about external barriers. For example, when children learned that a group lost a game due to rigged rules rather than lack of skill, they showed less preference for the winners. This suggests that how adults frame the world matters.

The identity of the child also influences these processes. The review indicates that children who belong to marginalized groups perceive inequality differently than those in dominant groups. As they get older, children from lower-status groups are less likely to view the social hierarchy as fair.

The researchers also discussed the developmental trajectory of these biases. The tendency to rely on internal explanations for inequality is strongest in younger children. As children enter late childhood and adolescence, they become more capable of understanding complex, structural arguments.

This developmental shift offers a window for intervention. Older children and adolescents are better able to grasp concepts like discrimination and historical injustice. This understanding can lead to a decrease in bias as they realize the system is not necessarily fair.

Despite the strong evidence gathered, the authors acknowledge limitations in the current field of study. Much of the research on inequality relies on “novel group” paradigms. In these studies, researchers create fictional groups (e.g., “Red Team” vs. “Blue Team”) to test how children react to status differences.

This method is used to avoid reinforcing actual racial stereotypes during experiments. However, the authors argue that novel groups cannot fully capture the reality of race in the United States. Race is deeply embedded in history and culture in a way that random team assignments are not.

The researchers call for future work that bridges the gap between social psychology and cognitive development. Social psychologists often focus on identity and cultural context. Cognitive developmentalists often focus on mental mechanics like the inherence heuristic.

Combining these perspectives could provide a more holistic understanding of racial bias. The authors suggest that future studies should safely examine how children reason about real-world racial inequality. This would require sensitive protocols to ensure children are not left with negative impressions.

The review ultimately argues that tackling racial bias requires addressing how children understand social status. Simply telling children that everyone is equal may not be enough if they observe stark inequalities in their daily lives. Interventions must help children understand why those inequalities exist.

By providing structural explanations for the disparities children see, adults may be able to interrupt the cognitive processes that lead to bias. The authors conclude that understanding these mechanisms is a necessary step toward fostering a more equitable society.

The study, “The Role of Social Status in the Development of Racial Bias in Childhood,” was authored by Amber D. Williams and Xinguo Zhang.