The Origins of Intergroup Resource Inequality Influence Children’s Decision to Perpetuate or Rectify Inequality

Abstract

Previous studies have explored children’s intergroup resource allocation in the context of preexisting intergroup resource inequality. However, resource inequality between social groups often originates from different factors. This study explored the role of the origins of resource inequality on children’s intergroup resource allocations. In experiment 1, when there was no explicit origin of the intergroup inequality, children of different ages mainly allocated resources in an equal way and 5- to 6-year-olds showed ingroup bias. In experiment 2, we examined the influence of different origins of intergroup inequality and found that 5- to 6-year-olds perpetuated intergroup inequality when resource inequality was based on either a structural (regional disparity) or an internal factor (difference in performance). However, 10- to 11-year-olds rectified inequality or allocated equally when intergroup inequality was based on regional disparity and perpetuated resource inequality when intergroup inequality was based on performance difference. The origins of inequality appear to play an important role in children’s intergroup resource allocations, and older children can distinguish different origins of intergroup inequality in resource allocation.

Why Do Children Allocate More to the Poor? Impact Factors and Motivation in Children's Need-Based Fair Decision-Making

“…In studies involving adults, it has been found that most adults are often indifferent to the unfairness caused by their own status (Elenbaas et al, 2020). An et al (2020) discovered that when resource inequality is based on structural factors (regional differences) or internal factors (performance differences), 5-to 6-year-old children tend to perpetuate this inequality. However, when resource inequality is based on regional differences, 10-to 11-year-old children tend to correct this inequality.…”

Relationship between perception of resource inequality and children's and adolescents' resource allocation decision: a protocol for systematic review and narrative synthesis

“…The information gathered through this review may be used to identify the perceptions and harmful behaviors of children and adolescents in relation to perpetuating social inequalities, exclusion and prejudice in the poor (Elenbaas et al, 2020). The review may also assist building the required knowledge to promote greater youth activism for justice and solidarity (McLoyd, 2019), assist the design of educational programs that seek to reduce social inequality and promote social justice (An et al, 2020); and finally, foster public policies aimed at building a more equitable society (Elenbaas et al, 2020).…”

Structural explanations for inequality reduce children’s biases and promote rectification only if they implicate the high-status group

“…When structural explanations are taught to children, they can understand them—children who learn that boys excel over girls at a new game due to differential access to resources (i.e., a structural rather than inherent cause), for example, expect such differences to remain stable as long as the structural constraint persists but not once it is revised ( 9 , 10 ). Yet, such explanations often do little to change how children think and feel about the low-status group: These explanations do not appear to reduce children’s biases in favor of the group with more ( 11 ) nor do they consistently lead to rectification [( 12 ); although they sometimes make children less accepting of the status quo, ( 13 )]. Also limiting the potential of prior experimental work to inform interventions to reduce bias and promote rectification, most past experiments have exposed children to structural processes with obvious perceptual causes and effects [e.g., boys’ classrooms having more equipment for a new game than girls’ classrooms; ( 9 , 10 )], rather than ones arising from more abstract and complex systems (e.g., policies, norms, and/or laws, many of which date back generations).…”

“…As a result, when children are taught about the structural conditions that lead to inequality (as in refs. 10 – 13 ), they may assume that these conditions reflect how things should be and thus fail to question or challenge them. But while these social–cognitive biases present possible challenges, they might be mitigated if children learn, concretely, about the structures’ origins: specifically, the role of the high-status group in creating, maintaining, and perpetuating the structures that give rise to the inequality.…”