To investigate whether children rectify social inequalities in a resource allocation task, participants (N = 185 African-American and European-American 5–6 year-olds and 10–11 year-olds) witnessed an inequality of school supplies between peers of different racial backgrounds. Assessments were conducted on how children judged the wrongfulness of the inequality, allocated new resources to racial ingroup and outgroup recipients, evaluated alternative allocation strategies, and reasoned about their decisions. Younger children showed ingroup favorability; their responses differed depending on whether they had witnessed their ingroup or an outgroup at a disadvantage. With age, children increasingly reasoned about the importance of equal access to school supplies and correcting past disparities. Older children judged the resource inequality negatively, allocated more resources to the disadvantaged group, and positively evaluated the actions of others who did the same, regardless of whether they had seen their racial ingroup or an outgroup at a disadvantage. Thus, balancing moral and social group concerns enabled individuals to rectify inequalities and ensure fair access to important resources regardless of racial group membership.

The present study investigated age-related changes regarding children’s (N = 136) conceptions of fairness and others’ welfare in a merit-based resource allocation paradigm. To test whether children at 3- to 5-years-old and 6- to 8-years-old took others’ welfare into account when dividing resources, in addition to merit and equality concerns, children were asked to allocate, judge, and reason about allocations of necessary (needed to avoid harm) and luxury (enjoyable to have) resources to a hardworking and a lazy character. While 3- to 5-year-olds did not differentiate between distributing luxury and necessary resources, 6- to 8-year-olds allocated luxury resources more meritoriously than necessary resources. Further, children based their allocations of necessary resources on concerns for others’ welfare, rather than merit, even when one character was described as working harder. The findings revealed that, with age, children incorporated the concerns for others’ welfare and merit into their conceptions of fairness in a resource allocation context, and prioritized these concerns differently depending on whether they were allocating luxury or necessary resources. Further, with age, children weighed multiple moral concerns including equality, merit, and others’ welfare, when determining the fair allocation of resources.

Children’s decisions regarding the allocation of societal resources in the context of preexisting inequalities were investigated. African-American and European-American children ages 5–6 years (n = 91) and 10–11 years (n = 94) judged the acceptability of a medical resource inequality on the basis of race, allocated medical supplies, evaluated different resource allocation strategies, and completed a measure of status awareness based on race. With age, children were increasingly aware of wealth status disparities between African-Americans and European-Americans, and judged a medical resource inequality between groups more negatively. Further, with age, children rectified the resource inequality over perpetuating it, but only when African-American children were disadvantaged. With age, children also referenced rights when reasoning about their judgments concerning the disadvantaged African-American group. When European-American children were disadvantaged, children did not systematically allocate more resources to one group over another. The results are discussed in terms of social inequalities, disadvantaged status, moral judgments, and intergroup attitudes.

Many people believe in equality of opportunity but overlook and minimize the structural factors that shape social inequalities in the United States and around the world, such as systematic exclusion (e.g., educational, occupational) based on group membership (e.g., gender, race, socioeconomic status). As a result, social inequalities persist and place marginalized social groups at elevated risk for negative emotional, learning, and health outcomes. Where do the beliefs and behaviors that underlie social inequalities originate? Recent evidence from developmental science indicates that an awareness of social inequalities begins in childhood and that children seek to explain the underlying causes of the disparities that they observe and experience. Moreover, children and adolescents show early capacities for understanding and rectifying inequalities when regulating access to resources in peer contexts. Drawing on a social reasoning developmental framework, we synthesize what is currently known about children’s and adolescents’ awareness, beliefs, and behavior concerning social inequalities and highlight promising avenues by which developmental science can help reduce harmful assumptions and foster a more just society.

This study examined how children's perceptions of economic inequalities impacted their moral judgments about access to opportunities. The sample included ethnically diverse 8-to 14-year-olds (N ϭ 267; M ϭ 11.61 years, SD ϭ 1.88) of middle-to upper-middle-income backgrounds. The larger the economic inequality in access to opportunities children perceived, the more negatively they evaluated granting access to a specific opportunity (an educational summer camp) to high-wealth peers alone, and the more they reasoned about the importance of fair access to learning. Further, children were more supportive of admitting low-wealth peers when they knew they had been excluded from the opportunity in the past, and children who chose to admit low-wealth peers reasoned about the implications of broader economic inequalities. Finally, most children preferred to take an active role in determining who should receive access to this special opportunity rather than leaving the decision to chance. These findings provide evidence for how perceptions of both broad and context specific intergroup relations contribute to moral judgments in childhood.

This study investigated children's ability to distinguish between resource inequalities with individual versus structural origins. Children (3‐ to 8‐years‐old; N = 93) were presented with resource inequalities based on either recipients’ merit (individual factor) or gender (structural factor). Children were assessed on their expectations for others’ allocations, own allocations, reasoning, and evaluations of others’ allocations. Children perpetuated merit‐based inequalities and either rectified or allocated equally in response to gender‐based inequalities. Older, but not younger, children expected others to perpetuate both types of inequalities and differed in their evaluations and reasoning. Links between children's allocations and judgments were also found. Results reveal novel insights into children's developing consideration of the structural and individual factors leading to resource inequalities.

Children and adolescents (N = 153, ages 8–14 years, Mage = 11.46 years) predicted and evaluated peer exclusion in interwealth (high‐wealth and low‐wealth) and interracial (African American and European American) contexts. With age, participants increasingly expected high‐wealth groups to be more exclusive than low‐wealth groups, regardless of their depicted race. Furthermore, children evaluated interwealth exclusion less negatively than interracial exclusion, and children who identified as higher in wealth evaluated interwealth exclusion less negatively than did children who identified as lower in wealth. Children cited explicit negative stereotypes about high‐wealth groups in their justifications, while rarely citing stereotypes about low‐wealth groups or racial groups. Results revealed that both race and wealth are important factors that children consider when evaluating peer exclusion.

Social exclusion and inclusion from groups, as well as the distribution of resources, are fundamental aspects of social life, and serve as sources of conflicts that bear on issues of fairness and equality, beginning in childhood. For the most part, research on social exclusion and allocation of resources has not focused on the issue of group membership. Yet, social exclusion from groups and the denial of resources reflect societal issues pertaining to social inequality and its counterpoint, fair treatment of others. Social inequality occurs when opportunities and resources are distributed unevenly in society, often through group norms about allocation that reflect socially defined categories of persons. This occurs at multiple levels of societal organization, from experiences of exclusion in childhood such as being left out of a play activity, to being denied access to resources as a member of a group. These situations extend to larger-level experiences in the adult world concerning social exclusion from voting, for example, or participation in educational institutions. Thus, most decisions regarding social exclusion and the denial of resources involve considerations of group identity and group membership, implicitly or explicitly, which contribute to prejudice and bias, even though this has rarely been investigated in developmental science. Current research illustrating the role of group identity and autonomy regarding decision-making about social exclusion and the denial of resources is reviewed from the social reasoning developmental model, a theoretical perspective that integrates social domain theory and developmental social identity theories to investigate how children use moral, conventional, and psychological judgments to evaluate contexts reflecting group identity, group norms, and intergroup dynamics.