Race preferences in children: insights from South Africa

Abstract

Minority-race children in North America and Europe often show less own-race favoritism than children of the majority (White) race, but the reasons for this asymmetry are unresolved. The present research tested South African children in order to probe the influences of group size, familiarity, and social status on children’s race-based social preferences. We assessed South African children’s preferences for members of their country’s majority race (Blacks) compared to members of other groups, including Whites, who ruled South Africa until 1994 and who remain high in status. Black children (3–13 years) tested in a Black township preferred people of their own gender but not race. Moreover, Black, White, and multiracial children (4–9 years) tested in a racially diverse primary school showed in-group bias by gender but not by race: all favored people who were White. Relative familiarity and numerical majority/minority status therefore do not fully account for children’s racial attitudes, which vary with the relative social status of different racial groups.

White Bias in 3–7-Year-Old Children across Cultures

“…On the whole, the doll preference of children in allBlack (54.4%) and racially mixed (52.6%) preschools was at chance (Fisher's exact test: p = .849), with no significant age effect nor any significant age by school interaction. This result confirms that African American children do not show a significant racial in-group preference (Clark and Clark, 1940;1947;Brand, Ruiz & Padilla, 1974;Aboud & Skerry, 1984;Aboud, 1988;Shutts et al, 2011). …”

“…Testing gender and race-based (skin color and facial feature proxy) preferences in 3-13 year-olds children from a black township of Johannesburg in South Africa, Shutts et al (2011) report in-group preference by gender, but not by race. In general, however, children showed a lighter skin preference, independently of whether they were familiar with White people or belonged to a numerical minority or majority in the township.…”

“…Recent studies suggest that perceived social status in terms of material wealth (Newheiser and Olson, 2012), political and socio-economic power within the larger society (Nesdale, 2001;Shutts et al, 2011), and social prestige (Chudek, Heller, Birch, & Henrich, 2012) could be important criteria for early social preferences. Testing gender and race-based (skin color and facial feature proxy) preferences in 3-13 year-olds children from a black township of Johannesburg in South Africa, Shutts et al (2011) report in-group preference by gender, but not by race.…”

Two Signatures of Implicit Intergroup Attitudes

“…First, our participants come from majority Black SIGNATURES OF IMPLICIT INTERGROUP ATTITUDES 15 schools and neighborhoods, complicating any simple argument from familiarity. Second, recent evidence suggests that when familiarity and status are in opposition, status clearly wins: Black South African children, including those from with little or no contact with Whites, do not show preference for their racial ingroup at either the explicit or implicit level (Shutts, Kinzler, Katz, Tredoux, & Spelke, 2011;Newheiser, Dunham, Merrill, Hoosain, & Olson, under review). Thus, we interpret our results as suggesting that the internalization of the prevailing status hierarchy is a rapidly emerging psychological imperative no less "basic" than a tendency towards ingroup preference.…”

Age-Related Changes in Children's Resource Giving: How Social Categories and Fairness Considerations Influence Distribution Decisions

“…By pre-school age, these explicit social preferences based upon social categories are considerably robust and extend beyond listening and learning preferences to who they trust and who they want as friends. These social preferences are exhibited based upon salient social categories including gender, race, language and accent, demonstrating that children harbour strong in-group preferences for same-gender (e.g., Shutts, Banaji, & Spelke, 2010), same-race (e.g., Aboud, Mendelson, & Purdy, 2003;Levy, 2000;Shutts, Kinzler, Katz, Tredoux, & Spelke, 2011), same-language (e.g., Kinzler, Shutts, & Spelke, 2012) and same-accent peers (e.g., Souza, ByersHeinlein, & Poulin-Dubois, 2013).…”