Abstract
Racial-ethnic inequity is deeply entrenched in U.S. social systems, yet adolescents’ voices and understanding around inequity are not often directly examined. The current qualitative study uses focus group data from African American (n = 21), Chinese- (n = 17), Indian- (n = 13), and Mexican- (n = 17) origin adolescents (Mage = 12.93 years; SD = 1.23; 51% boys) to provide insight on how youth navigate their attitudes and beliefs about these issues. Using a racial-ethnic socialization lens, we explore proximal (e.g., parents, peers, teachers) and distal (e.g., media, society) ways in which adolescents come to understand racial-ethnic inequity. Three themes characterized adolescents’ discussions. School diversity, of peers and of thought, and messages around egalitarianism were two prominent influences on their perceptions. A third theme related to perceptions of social hierarchies, which appeared to be shaped by stereotypes, peer interactions, and ideas about inequity itself. Emergent themes suggest that the school context is a particularly salient social setting that encompasses multiple sources of socialization (e.g., teachers, classmates, academics, climate), and parents, peers, and the media also play prominent roles.
Racism and racial-ethnic inequity 1 are deeply entrenched in the U.S. social system. Perhaps more than ever, contemporary social justice movements (e.g., Black Lives Matter, #HereToStay, #StopAsianHate) have situated rhetoric around inequity in the foreground of daily life. Developmental models (Brown & Bigler, 2005) and theory, along with research on critical consciousness (Watts et al., 2011), have been increasingly drawn upon to help explain how minoritized children and youth understand and navigate the meaning of race, racism, and bias. Yet, perhaps due to ease and access to convenience samples, much of the field’s understanding relies largely on survey data with a lack of directly focusing on perspectives of youth from racially-ethnically 2 minoritized backgrounds. Meaningful insight could be gained by investigating discourse around attitudes and beliefs about inequity and, by extension, equity and diversity, particularly during the critical developmental period of adolescence in which issues of identity, race, and racism are highly salient (Rivas-Drake et al., 2014).
The current study centers the voices of African American, Chinese-, Indian-, and Mexican-origin youth to shed new and needed light on the nuanced ways in which early adolescents open-endedly discuss and make sense of their sociocultural experiences. Each of these groups has been historically minoritized and comprise quickly-growing portions of the U.S. demographic, which speaks to the importance of spotlighting these youths’ marginalized perspectives. Using an ecological lens to consider proximal (e.g., parents, peers, teachers) and distal (e.g., media, society) socialization influences, we explore how adolescents learn about and make meaning of race and ethnicity. Moving beyond what is already known about racial-ethnic identity formation and racial-ethnic socialization, however, we focus specifically on how adolescents discuss issues of inequity. Moreover, our use of focus group data allows for the unique examination of the way in which adolescents dialog around their understanding of group dynamics and real-world attitudes and beliefs while in the context of an actual group-based setting. Used effectively, the interaction and conversation facilitated by focus groups can encourage participants to consider their attitudes and beliefs in comparison to others, thereby leading to more thoughtful precision and advancement in the way in which they might talk about themselves, their opinions, and their personal experiences (Acocella, 2012).
Contexts of Racial-Ethnic Learning
One way adolescents come to understand the significance of race and ethnicity is through racial-ethnic socialization (RES), the process by which youth gain knowledge on who they are and where they fit in the world with respect to race and ethnicity. Fundamentally, this learning takes place within the context of everyday experiences, of which parents and the family are particularly influential (Hughes et al., 2006). Although such family influences are vital, sources of RES are dynamic, organic, and variable across time, contexts, and situations (Hughes et al., 2016). Hence, while familial RES is important, it is necessary to better discern how contextual influences outside the family can also structure racial-ethnic understanding (Hughes et al., 2006). Guided by both the RES literature as well as an ecological approach (Bronfenbrenner, 2005), which also suggests that racial-ethnic-related processes are bound to diverse proximal and distal settings in which youth develop, the current study considers adolescents’ socialization experiences across multiple contexts in their lives. In exploring how diverse contexts such as peers, schools, and the media represent possible sources of socialization, we build upon the existing literature by targeting, specifically, the way in which youth discuss issues related to inequity with each other and across groups, which is a part of RES, but has not yet been the focus in current research.
Peer interactions
Developmentally, peer relationships become increasingly critical as youth spend more time with friends (Brown, 2004). Peer interactions are central in providing a source for RES, identity development, and possible encounters with bias or discrimination (Douglass et al., 2016; Thompson et al., 2020). For example, among Black adolescents, RES messages from peers were reported as being just as common as messages from parents (Lesane-Brown et al., 2005). Peers also comprise a unique space in which adolescents learn about very specific socially-relevant and racial/ethnic-influenced themes, for example, friendship selection or external expressions of identity such as style of dress or music tastes (Hughes et al., 2011).
Peers can also shape perceptions of equity by being perpetrators of discrimination, stereotyping, and bias (Greene et al., 2006), which have detrimental effects on a range of outcomes (e.g., depressive symptoms, self-esteem) (Benner et al., 2018). These microsystemic interactions could indicate inverse proximal contexts in which hostile or conflictual experiences could lead to poor adjustment (Merçon-Vargas et al., 2020). Yet, peers can also serve as resources and sources of social support that adolescents can lean on to strengthen their identities and cope with racism and unfavorable treatment (Chen & Graham, 2017). Prior work has found that, relative to other relationship contexts (e.g., parents), support from friends is critical for youth, especially for those from racial-ethnic minoritized backgrounds (Gonzalez et al., 2014).
Schools
Importantly, peer interactions do not occur within a vacuum, with many experiences happening within schools (Bellmore et al., 2012). Above and beyond providing a forum for which to experience peer relationships, the school context itself is a key social setting that encompasses multiple, salient spheres (e.g., classrooms, cafeteria, hallways) and reflects a microcosm of society (Tseng & Seidman, 2007). Most broadly, perceived norms and values of race-ethnicity can be learned within the realm of a school’s social climate, which includes racial-ethnic diversity, interracial interactions (quantity and quality), stereotypes, equitable treatment, and institutional support for positive social relationships (Byrd & Chavous, 2012). Notably, institutional support can span multiple influences including whether the school structure, administration, and teaching practices encourage racial-ethnic diversity and celebrate, rather than deemphasize, cultural differences (Hope et al., 2015; Walton et al., 2014). Empirical work has indeed shown that positive perceptions of racial-ethnic climate (e.g., equity, inclusivity) are beneficial, especially among youth of color (Benner et al., 2015), while hostile racial climates can breed divisiveness and marginalization Grapin et al., 2019). Disciplinary practices, school curriculum, and academic tracking are also linked to school climate, and constitute mechanisms through which youth might implicitly or explicitly gain racial-ethnic knowledge, particularly given that such school-based practices can be racially-ethnically biased (Bigler et al., 2001).
Youth also learn about diversity and multiculturalism, including their place in the world, from proximal interactions and relationships with teachers and other school staff (Aldana & Byrd, 2015; Walton et al., 2014). Theory and research consistently point to teachers and adults within school settings as possible perpetrators of bias (Juang & Kiang, 2019). Such unfair treatment, whether experienced or observed, has meaningful implications (Weeks & Sullivan, 2019), with some work designing comprehensive measures to assess such impact (Byrd, 2019). However, much of the existing research on schools’ socialization influences remains limited in its predominant focus on older adolescents and college settings.
Media
Adolescents’ developmental contexts go beyond direct interactions with parents, peers, and schools. Contemporary events, media, and social media dominate youths’ daily lives (Coyne et al., 2013; Jerald et al., 2017), which speaks to the importance of considering how such influences socialize and shape perceptions of race-ethnicity. However, much of the literature has focused solely on African Americans. Moreover, media, current events, and other distal contexts as sources of RES have been understudied compared to proximal influences (Hughes et al., 2016). Little is known about how these mechanisms shape views of inequity, despite the fact that widespread rhetoric touting racism and “political incorrectness” has dominated the media since the 2016 U.S. presidential election in particularly harmful ways (Shafer, 2017; Southern Poverty Law Center, 2017) and even more increasingly since the COVID-19 and racism pandemics.
As with peers and other socialization contexts, the influence of media on adolescents’ understanding of racial-ethnic issues can be both boon (e.g., connecting marginalized youth with social support and activism) (Stornaiuolo & Thomas, 2017) and bane (e.g., increasing exposure to stereotypes, discrimination, and bias) (Tynes et al., 2012; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2015). Such societal messaging at the macrosystem level could also intersect with other socializing agents (e.g., schools) in the micro and mesosystems, as when parents or teachers utilize current events to call attention to stereotypes, discuss responses to racial-ethnic interactions, and proactively foster racial-ethnic identities (Adams & Stevenson, 2012).
Perceptions of Inequity, Racial-Ethnic Status, and Social Hierarchies
Social stratification and racial bias are important in contouring youth outcomes (Coll et al., 1996; Spencer et al., 1997); yet, the contrasting egalitarian notion that people are equal is commonly communicated to youth (Hughes et al., 2006). While egalitarian views are prominent and promising ideals to which many strive, they can take different forms, including possible slippage into “color-evasiveness,” 3 which insinuates that race and racism do not exist (Apfelbaum et al., 2012; Ono, 2010). For example, in a qualitative study of elementary school teachers, Walton et al. (2014) found that egalitarian messages transmitted to students differed in nuanced ways (e.g., procedural-justice, distributive-justice), including what they called “colormuteness.” This approach highlights similarities over differences but, in doing so, perpetuates silence and avoidance in talking about race and ethnicity. Adolescents’ understanding of social status could be therefore shaped by themes that promote equity on the one hand, but minimize the reality or value of racial-ethnic differences on the other.
Critical consciousness frameworks have long emphasized the importance of developing a realistic awareness of social conditions alongside a keen recognition of systems of injustice (Watts et al., 2011). Particularly for those who are disenfranchised, such knowledge of inequity can motivate individuals to take collective action to end oppression and work toward sociopolitical change (Freire, 1973). From the standpoint of critical race theory, bias and inequity are deeply embedded within the educational system (Ladson-Billings, 1998), and views about comparative social status within these systems can structure how youth learn about race and ethnicity (Hughes et al., 2006).
More specifically tied to comparative race relations, Gould (1996) describes how the White majority’s efforts to maintain the status quo have created a system of racial geometry that positions minoritized groups against each other. For example, Asian Americans are often considered “honorary Whites” who are above other minority groups, but still below White Americans in status and power (Tuan, 1999). Similarly, racial triangulation models (Kim, 1999; Zou & Cheryan, 2017) suggest dual axes of racial positioning, one that focuses on relative value or perceived inferiority (e.g., among intellectual, economic, occupational domains) and another on perceived cultural foreignness or being an “outsider.” According to these dimensions, all groups of color are seen as having lower relative value compared to Whites. Additionally, minority groups themselves vary along continuums of value (with Blacks seen as lowest) and outsider status (with Asians and Latinxs viewed as more “outsider” or “foreign” compared to Blacks). Ramifications of such systems of inequity can also be seen through within-group conflict, such as misdirected anger, internalized racism, or “black on black” crime. These dynamic processes can play out in everyday life, with social-racial-ethnic hierarchies translating to possible cross-group divisions and biased treatment between minoritized and White groups and among minoritized groups (Qin et al., 2008).
Importantly, much of the literature on power and group dynamics has centered on adult experiences. Whether and how adolescents discuss such racial geometry in conversations about race and ethnicity, such as where their group stands in relation to others, has yet to be understood and articulated. Hence, it is developmentally important and timely to shed light on the implications of such influences and examine how differential experiences, whether direct or vicarious, might direct youth narratives about race-ethnicity, interpretations of hierarchies, and critical perceptions of intra- and inter-group relations.
The Current Study
The current study responds to calls to build knowledge on how youth learn about inequity, power, and oppression (Grapin et al., 2019), including how socialization messages regarding one’s own group and other groups interact with wider sociocultural or sociopolitical topics. With the use of adolescent focus groups, we examine youths’ conversations around their race-related attitudes and beliefs, zeroing in on the way in which they talk about racial-ethnic inequity, specifically, and how their attitudes and beliefs are informed by both proximal and distal contexts.
Our approach provides rich, open-ended insight into lived experiences and allows youth voices to speak for themselves within the context of conversations with other peers, which has the added benefit of allowing for more refined considerations of one’s personal beliefs, opinions, and experiences (Acocella, 2012). Inductive analyses center how adolescents discuss and make sense of their sociocultural experiences, including how perceptions are shaped by different socialization influences (i.e., family, peers, school, society/media). Our focus on early adolescence speaks to the high import of social standing and status, relationships, and identity formation among this developmental period (Erikson, 1968). By including diverse racial-ethnic perspectives (African American, Chinese-, Indian-, and Mexican-origin), our work provides insight on how youth from different sociocultural backgrounds come to make sense of their lived, real-world thoughts and experiences related to inequity, racism, and intergroup dynamics.
Methods
Participants
The current study focused on four minoritized racial-ethnic groups in the United States: African American, Mexican-origin, Chinese-origin, and Indian-origin (South Asian). Data were collected from a series of 15 focus group interview sessions with adolescents (n = 4 African American, n = 6 Mexican American, n = 3 Chinese American, n = 2 Indian American). Across all focus groups, in total, there were 68 adolescents: 21 African American adolescents (Mage = 13.2 years, SD = 1.3; 52.4% boys), 17 Mexican American adolescents (Mage = 12.8 years, SD = 1.1; 70.6% girls), 17 Chinese American adolescents (Mage = 12.1 years, SD = 1.2; 82.4% boys), and 13 Indian American adolescents (Mage = 13.6 years, SD = 1.2; 60% girls).
Procedures
Focus group data were drawn from the Promoting Dialogues Project, an investigation that explored how parents and youth engage in conversations about race-ethnicity and discrimination with an emphasis on the facilitators and barriers to RES. The original study used a mixed method design to center the experiences of parents and adolescents from four racial-ethnic groups. For the present analyses, focus group data are particularly rich and insightful given the facilitated context in which adolescents can discuss group dynamics while actually engaging in a group conversation with their peers of the same racial-ethnic group.
Data collection occurred from Summer 2017 to Spring 2019 in the Southeastern and Northeastern U.S. Families were recruited through a variety of strategies including community-based organizations, events, flyers, and social media, as well as through snowball sampling or word of mouth. Youths’ familiarity with each other varied depending on the group. For example, in some cases, some of the participating youth attended the same schools. In other cases, youth were familiar with each other through out-of-school activities but did not attend the same schools. There were also groups in which youth were not acquainted with each other prior to the session. As part of the larger study, separate focus groups were simultaneously conducted with parents, but the current study centers only on youth voices.
Focus groups were divided by racial-ethnic group and conducted in private settings that were convenient to participants (e.g., homes, community centers, classrooms during after school hours). Each session lasted about 1 hour and were not intentionally divided by adolescents’ gender, age, or grade level. All were semi-structured and facilitated by a combination of primary investigators, graduate students, and undergraduate research assistants who were female and matched to participants’ race-ethnicity. Note-takers, also matched to participants’ race-ethnicity, were present in most sessions. All sessions were conducted in English, audio-recorded, and then transcribed by trained research assistants. Upon completion, all transcripts were reviewed for accuracy. Youth received $15 gift cards for participation.
Measures
Table 1 presents the main questions from the focus group interview guide employed in the larger project. The primary questions were identical across all racial-ethnic groups, but follow-up probes varied depending on the discussion (e.g., groups with Mexican-origin youth talked in greater detail about experiences with Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE).
Main Questions of Interest From the Adolescent Focus Group Interview Guide.
Data Analysis
Inductive thematic analysis was used to observe and identify patterns within and across adolescent focus groups. Thematic analysis provided a flexible fit (Braun & Clarke, 2006) for our constructivist approach to the data, allowing us to focus our attention on adolescents’ worldview, meaning making, and perceptions as they related to racial-ethnic inequity within and across the four minoritized racial-ethnic groups. Guided by six phases as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006), a multilingual, racially and ethnically diverse analytic team coded all transcripts. The analytic team consisted of two undergraduate research assistants as coders, four graduate research assistants who assisted with data interpretation, and the second author as coding manager and lead analyst. ATLAS.ti version 8.4, a qualitative data management software, was used to aid in data management. For clarity, we first detail the general analysis procedures used for the larger project and then provide details specific to the current study’s analysis, which was emergent.
For the larger project, the entire team first engaged in an iterative process where members met weekly to complete phases 1 and 2 of the thematic analysis. Phase 1 consisted of an active reading and re-reading of transcripts, beginning with two transcripts per racial-ethnic group to become familiarized with the data within a feasible timeframe. Team members were encouraged to take notes of general patterns and potential codes. At phase 2, the team met to talk about preliminary open codes, discussing points of agreement and disagreement until consensus was reached. These preliminary codes formed the first rendition of the codebook. The two coders used this codebook to independently assign codes to transcripts, line-by-line; hence, each transcript was independently coded by the two coders. Coders were instructed to create memos within the software as they progressed, outlining preliminary observations and emphasizing points for reflexivity. Phases 1 and 2 were done in cycles over a 9-month period where the team started with Mexican American transcripts and ended with Indian American transcripts. Throughout this process, the second author adjusted the codebook after reaching group consensus following each reading of a new set of transcripts. Because transcripts represented four racial-ethnic groups with potentially distinct experiences, a hybrid of a priori (deductive) and open coding (inductive) was used. Our inclusion of open coding, including in vivo coding, allowed for the presence of emergent codes derived from youth narratives. More details related to the coding process for the larger project are provided elsewhere (Martin Romero et al., 2021).
In the third phase of the thematic analysis, the second author grouped codes into categories based on the larger project’s aims of identifying facilitators and barriers to RES conversations. During this phase, the second author began to observe preliminary patterns related to adolescents’ perspectives on stereotypes, discrimination, group dynamics, and social inequity. To further explore and interrogate these patterns, aided by ATLAS.ti, the second author used query tools and co-occurring tables along with code network nodes reflective of prevalent socializing agents such as school, parents, and peers, and prominent categories of stereotypes and discrimination within each adolescent racial-ethnic group. The second author also created handwritten thematic maps to visualize and verify evolving patterns across and within racial-ethnic groups. During the final phases of analysis, the first and second authors frequently met to discuss analytic observations and finalize the naming, defining, and refining of themes. This analysis culminated in the writing of this manuscript with discussion and consensus by all authors on the final themes presented and their accuracy in reflecting the data and the current study’s aims.
Positionality
The Promoting Dialogues research team from which this current study stems consisted of multiple individuals, representing each racial-ethnic background of the interviewed participants, in addition to individuals who self-identified as Multiracial or White. Such diversity was upheld throughout the entire research process, from study design to data analysis and the writing of this manuscript. Notably, however, no research team members were adolescents (the research population of interest). The primary investigators of the Promoting Dialogues project self-identify as Mexican American, Chinese American, African American, and White American women. The Promoting Dialogues project was designed with a critical framework for the development of an intervention aimed at helping families navigate RES conversations, particularly in response to the divisive political rhetoric of 2016. As such, the desire to help youth and families of color in the face of bias guided the original project’s questions and its subsequent analyses. The authors of the current study consist of the original primary investigators along with the lead analyst who self-identifies as a young, Black woman. During analysis and the writing of this manuscript, the first and second authors took care to hold space for the heaviness of adolescents’ narratives around social inequity by reflecting on their own experiences as women of color living in the U.S. while conducting such an analysis during the heightened reawakening of social injustice in the U.S. following the deaths of Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, and others in 2020, coupled with rising rates of anti-Asian violence amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. All authors of the current study had previous experience in working with adolescents of color and each brought varying expertise in conducting research with adolescents.
Results
Adolescents’ conversations around race and discrimination organically led to observed, multifaceted dialogs as highlighted in the current analyses. Three themes that capture the nature of adolescents’ perspectives include (1) how diversity takes shape within schools, (2) messages and views on egalitarianism and social justice, and (3) adolescents’ understanding of social hierarchies as shaped through stereotypes, social interactions, and view of inequity. Table 2 provides a breakdown of the three themes, their subthemes, and examples of associated codes with definitions.
Themes and Associated Exemplar Codes With Definitions.
Dissecting the D word, Diversity: What Does it Mean?
Adolescents tended to discuss diversity within the context of their proximal educational settings. Conversations specifically focused on the racial-ethnic diversity of the school’s student body, including exposure to racially-ethnically diverse peers, as well as diversity of thought.
Diversity of faces
There was a lack of consensus across adolescents in terms of what diversity is and how to define the concept. At times, adolescents’ descriptions defined diversity as a balanced representation of many different racial-ethnic groups. Other descriptions referred to diversity as a predominately non-White context while, for others, diversity simply meant not a fully White context. Across all racial-ethnic groups, adolescents commented on the role of diversity of their school’s racial-ethnic composition in shaping their experiences at school. For some, the greater the diversity of peers present at school meant the less discrimination one encountered. As one Indian American adolescent put it plainly, “there’s like everyone, like every single group, and so I don’t think like our school has a problem with that.” Offering further evidence, when talking about her experience in a predominantly African American class and whether racial-ethnic discrimination was an issue, one Mexican American youth stated: It doesn’t really happen at school just because like – how do I say this? Most of my classmates are African American so they kind of know what being discriminated, they know what it feels like so they don’t really touch on it. And like if my teachers do, like, they usually also don’t touch on it. . .
Participants’ perceptions of diversity leading to less discrimination meant that there was little to no need to talk about inequity, potentially contributing to a broader sense of color-evasiveness.
In addition, the exposure to different racial-ethnic groups at school often meant the formation of “very diverse” friendship circles. In some cases, such exposure allowed for the formation of ally-ship based on the commonality of being “minorities.” For example, one Indian American adolescent shared: I had one friend through 3rd and continuing now. The African American girl I was talking about. She has been through it all. She’s been through racist things and she has also moved a lot. So, she can relate to things I am saying and that is why I like her much and, also, she was the only friend in my entire life.
The shared experience of being othered within the school context thus appeared to drive adolescents to find solidarity among peers from different minoritized racial-ethnic groups. However, in contrast to the abovementioned example of coalition-like ally-ship facilitated by school diversity, some participants’ narratives highlighted the reality of “issues between different ethnic groups” including discriminatory encounters perpetrated by peers of other minoritized groups in addition to those inflicted by White peers. This reality made clear that the presence of racial-ethnic diversity did not always perfectly translate to positive peer interactions at school.
Diversity of thought
Beyond school diversity as a concept related to peer racial-ethnic composition, schools were often cited as sites where adolescents learned of historical and current events related to racial inequity, sometimes through school curriculum and an exhibited diversity of thought. According to adolescents’ accounts, some schools and teachers made intentional efforts to discuss current events and social movements, such as Black Lives Matter, along with topics related to the historical presence of racial inequity in the U.S. However, adolescents were aware of the backlash faced by teachers who chose to speak with students on topics perceived to be controversial. For example, Mexican American adolescents mentioned the efforts of some of their teachers:
He’s Caucasian so he wants to know more about our culture. He lets us have a talk and share our stories and our culture with other people because it’s some ignorant people who don’t really wanna know about it.
Well, my English teacher, we were talking about the Black Lives Matter and she was like, “What do you-” like it was just me and there’s a Paki guy in my class since we’re like a Black school and she was like, “What do y’all feel about it? Do you see it like we’re more in power? Or what do you think, like it opens the doors to us also as our race because it just shows like everybody’s equal not just White people?”
Like y’all didn’t start here either. Native Americans were here first.
These are interesting points. I’m glad that your teachers let you guys have these conversations because these are hard conversation to have in school.
But the thing is that the school I go to there’s only really like—The other teachers don’t like when he talks about it with us. They get angry at him and stuff but he’s like, “I don’t care. I just want to know cause I’m Caucasian and my culture and my ancestors they didn’t go through anything like that, like segregation and like the thing with the Hispanics and stuff.”
According to adolescents’ reports, some teachers were noticeably uncomfortable with any discussion on race, especially regarding current events like Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Adolescents even recounted threats for suspension if one were to attempt to dialog about certain topics and, as a result, understood teachers’ discomfort as a sign of indifference stating, “They just don’t care about where we came from and our stuff. They just ignore us.”
Juxtaposition of Egalitarianism Views and Observed Inequities
Adolescents from all backgrounds described common perspectives reflecting egalitarian teachings. These messages came from multiple sources of socialization, but mostly from within the family context. From these messages it was clear that parents had a sincere desire for their children to feel equal to other children of different racial-ethnic backgrounds. Adolescents’ recounting of messages reflected parents’ encouragement for their children to treat others equally, teaching them to be “good human beings first”—a view that was heavily endorsed across all racial-ethnic groups. Based on their understandings of egalitarian messages, adolescents often made attempts to apply them to everyday life and current events. For example, adolescents believed in the egalitarian values imparted by their parents, but they were also aware of shortcomings in the U.S., expressing sentiments like, “Everybody should be treated equally, but in this case it’s not.” When probed for what comments they might have heard about Mexican people at the time of the 2016 U.S. presidential election and how they felt about it, the following dialog was exchanged among Mexican American adolescents.
I mean we should have a president that would like—
Equal rights?
Yeah, equal rights, to. . .everybody have equal rights and with just everybody to be equal.
Yeah.
Because we’re all humans. Because Donald Trump thinks that Mexicans are lazy, don’t like to work and, to me, majority of all the Mexicans like to work. Because when you’re in the car you see like mostly Black people and White people homeless and asking for money, not having to work.
In this example, adolescents were clearly cognizant of the contradicting reality in the U.S.; however, in defense of one’s own racial-ethnic group, one adolescent relied on generalizations and a limited understanding of homelessness in the U.S. to make sense of rhetoric, juxtaposed with the sentiment that all humans deserve to be treated equally.
The belief in equality also often translated to superficial or surface-level understandings of racial-ethnic inequity, which often ignored the importance of U.S. historical context. For example, when talking about the Black Lives Matter movement and what they would say to their younger siblings, one African American adolescent commented: My parents, they’ll talk about how Black Lives Matter and all that stuff. So, my sister’s in second grade now. So, what I would probably tell her is Black Lives—Black lives—our lives is not the only lives that matter because everybody lives matter. We’re all human beings. We should care about each other. We shouldn’t be like starting wars. We should probably be finding a solution to where we can all get together and become one.
This sentiment in emphasizing unity while ignoring existing inequities was common. Similarly, surface-level understandings of fairness extended to other topics like policy, immigration, affirmative action, and the distribution of educational resources. One example about immigration comes from this interchange during one of the focus groups with Chinese American adolescents:
Do your parents say anything about the police or immigration?
Immigration, yes. My mom like doesn’t like immigration.
Oh.
She doesn’t like those. . . uh, you know. . .
ICE? The immigration officers?
Yea. . .no, no. The refugees. She doesn’t like them.
Wait, what’s that?
Refugee?
Like those people that—
From Mexico
Undocumented immigrants?
(multiple adolescents agree)
Yea, I read about DACA. I think that’s really unfair because-
About stopping DACA?
Yeah, I think stopping DACA is the right thing to do because you can’t just like let illegal immigrants come here and go to good schools.
I still have an open mind on that.
So, have you talked with your parents about that?
Oh yea, mom talks about that to me.
Yeah, I think it’s really bad. For my parents to come they had to study really hard and these people they just escape into here into America and once they give birth to a child and then they bring them over and they get free citizenship.
I keep an open mind. I prefer to keep an open mind on everything.
In this example, adolescents’ views on immigration varied. The back-and-forth of the dialog, including efforts to define “refugee” or understand the who/what/why of DACA policy encapsulates the dynamic nature of adolescents’ conversations and thoughts on this controversial topic. Adolescents’ opinions on such complex matters reflected an intricate synthesis of their understanding of egalitarianism, their parents’ experiences and opinions, and rhetoric from the media and broader society. However, in the absence of discussions on power, privilege, social stratification, and history, such opinions may be limited to basic concepts of race, discrimination, and surface-level understandings of societal realities that challenge egalitarian desires.
The Formation of Socio-Racial-Ethnic Hierarchies in Real-Time
Messages reflecting stereotypes and generalizations from multiple sources that were both proximal and distal (e.g., media, school, peers) flooded adolescent focus groups. Figure 1 highlights the phrases that adolescents referenced when discussing race-ethnicity, within the context of a social ladder and potential triangulation in social hierarchies. We include the Asian panethnic label to reflect participants’ references to this larger group. We also include the term “Black” to refer to African Americans based on participants’ more frequent use of this label. Descriptions about one’s own racial-ethnic group and other racial-ethnic groups were present among all adolescents. In addition, all groups made references to White individuals/population as the main comparison. As illustrated, labels about specific groups were diverse in valence and some were shared across races-ethnicities. For example, “go back to where you came from” was commonly used to refer to Mexican, Indian, and Chinese American groups, emphasizing foreignness, while the term “smart” was reserved for Whites and the Asian panethnic group. Notably, for African American and Mexican American groups no subjectively positive labels were present.
Labels and stereotypes illustrated in the context of social ladders and hierarchies.
Stereotypes about one’s group in relation to others
Across all groups, adolescents expressed their frustration with stereotypes about their group, citing their falseness/fallacies. As a result of this frustration, many mentioned desires to work against them. This desire often served as motivation for adolescents to prove stereotypes wrong. For example, one Chinese American adolescent stated, “I hate stereotypes. I hate all the type of stereotypes so that’s why sometimes I just literally like go out my way just to break stereotypes. That’s also one of the reasons why I even started sports.” For others, frustration with stereotypes meant choosing to or feeling the pressure to leave a good impression on behalf of one’s racial-ethnic group. When recalling their friendship with classmates, one Indian American adolescent described a sense of obligation they felt to positively represent Indian culture: But the main thing was, especially for me, I was the only Indian kid for all three years, so I would be the smartest out of all of them. I guess it was just like making sure that I don’t ruin it for everybody. You know what I mean, like people who grow up seeing one Indian person will think everyone is like that. Which is how it is, typical stereotype. So, you have to make sure that you don’t fall into a negative stereotype where they think that “Oh, all Indians act like this, ew.” You have to be that perfect role model.
Adolescents’ recall of messages from parents regarding one’s own group status often reflected an emphasis on the need to work harder because of existing socio-racial inequalities. This was evident across adolescents’ perspectives within all racial-ethnic groups. For example, in one focus group with African American adolescents, it was mentioned how their parents encouraged them to, “do your best so you can show them that we’re not just, you know, just a race that is on welfare” while emphasizing that “the system is not meant for Black people.” Overt expressions of U.S. inequity were most present among African American adolescents compared to all other racial-ethnic adolescent groups.
Adolescents also talked often about the portrayal of racial-ethnic stereotypes in the media, including the news, movies, and television shows. Adolescents pointed out patterns seen in the media, such as the African American character experiencing unfair consequences or being “the first one to die in movies. . .and look like the stupid ones.” White dominance in popular reality crime and talk shows was also discussed, in addition to stereotypical stock characters in teen programing (e.g., “Indian kid as like really weak and smart”).
Stereotypes and generalizations not only informed perceptions of individuals outside of their racial-ethnic group but also of within-group members. For some, this meant holding negative perceptions. This was especially true for some African American adolescents who discussed intragroup dynamics and, at times, displayed possible internalized racism through the expression of negative self/group perceptions. This tension was especially evident in the following interchange:
Okay, so I love Black people but I don’t like them. It’s like they ignorant.
Not all Black people.
I know, but most Black people that I see are ignorant so when I say I don’t like Black people, people be like “oh, you racist” but I’m not racist, I just don’t like the ignorant kind of Black people.
Why do you feel that some Black people are ignorant?
Because that’s the way they act. I mean it’s. . .
You got to have a reason for why.
The way they act?
I mean. . .like if you see the way Black people act. Not all Black people, but some Black people they don’t act right.
So, you trying to say they don’t act calm?
No, not that.
What he’s probably trying to say—
Okay, everyone doesn’t act calm, I get that, but you don’t got to be ignorant about it. They do a lot of stupid stuff.
In this interchange, adolescents challenged each other’s opinion, displaying the variation of adolescents’ perspectives in real-time. Within this same focus group, White peers were perceived as “more positive” and, thus, better to “hang out with” in comparison to African American peers. Here, negative perceptions of one’s own racial-ethnic group shaped some African American adolescents’ decisions in forming friendships and selecting peer groups. This sentiment regarding in-group peers was not observed among the focus groups with Mexican, Chinese, or Indian American adolescents (see Figure 1).
Discriminatory experiences shape perceptions of hierarchies
Racial-ethnic discriminatory experiences also shaped adolescents’ perceptions of racial-ethnic inequity as well as their understanding of the socio-racial-ethnic hierarchies at play. These experiences spanned proximal and distal contexts and were sometimes of personal account, of their parents’ and peers’, or reflective of altercations and currents events broadcasted through media (e.g., news outlets). Discriminatory experiences varied across groups, reflecting the unique characteristics of discrimination faced by the adolescent participants based on their racial-ethnic backgrounds. We provide brief examples to help exemplify such differences in group experience; however, the brevity of examples does not signify less importance. Mexican Americans had their intelligence second-guessed by peers, while Chinese Americans were assumed as non-athletic or were constantly mistaken for the “other [Asian] kid” in class or at camp. For Indian Americans, experiences included being called a “terrorist” while African Americans often cited unfair treatment by teachers. Such experiences based on racial-ethnic group demonstrate multi-layered incidents of peer, academic, and institutional forms of discrimination along with foreigner objectification.
At the most proximal level, adolescents recalled discriminatory encounters perpetrated by teachers, staff, and peers. One African American adolescent recounted an eighth-grade experience: I had this racist teacher she always um . . . I wouldn’t call her racist but everyone, we already knew what she was doing. So, she paid more attention to the White kids than she paid to us so she, I guess she felt that we would like didn’t really know anything. So, she basically focused on the other kids.
Another example was shared by an Indian American adolescent: The same person that I was talking about that gave me the racism he was like umm I’m gonna stay away from her. When I actually came into the school I looked. . ..pretty darker than everybody else. I didn’t know how to speak proper English at that time either so I had a really strong accent and messed up words with Hindi words. So, they would usually call me like, “oh, she’s a terrorist like stay away from her,” all that kind of stuff.
This example illustrates the important intersection between race and ethnicity, with this adolescent recounting experiences that are both racialized (e.g., colorism) and based on microaggressions around perceived foreignness (e.g., language-based discrimination). The relegation of this adolescent as a “terrorist” based on phenotype and background is also notable.
Outside of school, some adolescents’ reports included being followed in stores, receiving weird looks from strangers, particularly when speaking a language other than English, and consistently being pulled aside by TSA at the airport, among others. One example recounted by an African American adolescent also demonstrated the prejudiced treatment faced by White peers due to their friendship or association with others from minoritized racial-ethnic groups:
This [White] girl, me, and my friend walked past this guy’s house and he said, “Are they hurting you?” and my [White] friend said, “No, sir. I’m friends with them.” He said, “Oh, you are just a big old whigger.”
Whigger? What is a whigger?
It’s a white nigga.
Adolescents also discussed vicarious exposure to discrimination experienced by parents, which often took place at work. For example, one Mexican American adolescent described how their mother “used to work with this man who treated her really badly because she was Mexican,” citing “rude comments” that their mother preferred not to disclose in detail to the adolescent. Other adolescents, like those in the Indian American group, cited their parents’ experience in the workplace where they would receive a heavier and more difficult workload compared to their coworkers.
Even more broadly, adolescents mentioned various media outlets (such as social media platforms and television news channels) as relevant socializing agents in the context of discrimination. For some, media outlets and the resulting exposure to current events, such as the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and election, served as an awakening to the existing racism present in the U.S. One Mexican American adolescent admitted: . . .before I even knew about Trump I didn’t really know about people being racist towards Mexicans that much and I never got much knowledge about it but when I found out he said all of those things and there was more people that agreed with him or started to agree with him, then we started talking more about it.
For others, like some in the African American focus groups, exposure to discriminatory encounters through media outlets was exhausting. As one African American adolescent put it: “I’m tired of actually hearing about Black. . .I’m just tired about hearing anybody get killed. Like especially now. . .They keep these statues then it shows what these people actually did to these Black people. I’m just tired of hearing it.” Such, often constant, exposure, in addition to the stereotypes commonly perpetuated by media as mentioned earlier, sent clear messages to adolescents about how society viewed them and their respective racial-ethnic groups.
Additionally, adolescents’ recollection and interpretation of parents’ socialization messages that centered on how to interface with others from a different racial-ethnic group, including dictation or suggestions on peer selection, signaled to adolescents the existence of socio-racial-ethnic hierarchies. For example, some adolescents cited examples of promotion of mistrust messages, where their parent advised them to avoid “hanging out” with certain groups due to prejudiced beliefs held about that group. Other parental messages highlighted an awareness of other minoritized groups’ struggles while signaling an understanding of one’s own group’s positionality and its associated benefits and risks. One key example came from an Indian American adolescent who commented: People are getting pulled over in their car for no reason. My dad was saying that if that ever happens to you, don’t move, don’t do anything but, in the U.S., Indians are going to have a higher chance of surviving a cop than any other minority race. Minority compared to Indians. So, don’t be that afraid but be down to earth.
Supporting this awareness, Chinese adolescents expressed similar sentiments such as, “I’ve seen articles about police being prejudice but not really against Asians.” Whether based on messages received at home, direct and vicarious experiences of discrimination, or media representations, youth across all groups were clearly aware of and attuned to stereotypes and generalizations associated with themselves and others. Notably, personal and family experiences of discrimination served as reminders about where they and their racial-ethnic group were placed on the ladder of societal value. These messages and discriminatory encounters, combined with adolescents’ understanding of egalitarianism and varied meanings of diversity, informed conceptualizations of one’s own racial-ethnic group’s social positioning, along with where other racial-ethnic group members stood along the same ladder, revealing inequities.
Discussion
Societal implications of racial-ethnic inequity abound (Killen et al., 2011). However, there is a serious gap in the literature in terms of understanding how adolescents naturally dialog around their attitudes and beliefs about inequity. Given the salience of social standing and status, relationships, and identity formation during the developmental period of adolescence (Erikson, 1968), our focus on youth voices provided much-needed qualitative detail on adolescents’ perceptions of racial-ethnic inequity, and how these perceptions are informed by proximal (e.g., schools, teachers, parents, peers) and distal (e.g., media, society) contexts. Our inclusion of youth from diverse minoritized backgrounds speaks to the importance of examining those who experience different types of treatment and social positionality. Indeed, our analyses suggest some similarities in the way in which adolescents across racial-ethnic groups talk about these issues, but also some differences.
Three broad themes emerged, each of which centered on the different ways that adolescents interpret and make meaning out of their interactions with same- and cross-ethnic-racial others as well as their overall perceptions of race and ethnicity embedded within the social contexts of schools, families, and media. Our interrelated themes align with theoretical work highlighting the dynamic, transactional nature of how familial racial-ethnic socialization, discrimination experiences, and social contexts mutually influence how youth connect with peers around issues of race, culture, and equity (Hughes et al., 2016).
Discussions of Diversity
One theme centered on conceptualizations of diversity—in terms of people as well as thought. Most of these conversations about diversity were framed within the school setting, as the space outside of the family where other racial-ethnic groups were likely to be encountered. Notably, diversity contoured adolescents’ experiences in both positive and negative ways. On the one hand, more racial-ethnic diversity found among schools with high proportions of minoritized youth in general had the potential to boost ally-ship and increase an overall sense of belonging. Consistent with prior work (Kawabata & Crick, 2011), such cross-group solidarity could help alleviate or even prevent victimization. However, an apparent backlash of diversity could also occur, such as when youth from diverse schools saw race-ethnicity as a non-issue, potentially contributing to a sense of color-evasiveness that is not reflective of reality (Castro-Atwater, 2016). There is also the issue of having the presence of diverse faces versus actually engaging in meaningful cross-group interactions; some of our participants’ conversations alluded to some possible distinctions along these lines.
Discussing diversity of thought within the educational setting, some youth provided examples of teachers who seemed uncomfortable talking about race-related issues and conveying ideologies of color-evasiveness or color muteness (Walton et al., 2014). Some even discussed punitive measures that might be taken against students who were vocal about these issues in school. This lack of teacher support and investment in students, as individuals, could have negative downstream implications in terms of achievement and well-being (Raufelder et al., 2016). Yet, some did describe teachers who deliberately engaged in such conversations despite pushback from administration and other school staff. These adult figures could serve as positive leaders and role models for allyship and in guiding youth through racial-ethnic concerns.
Egalitarianism and Social Equity
Another theme that emerged highlighted different views on egalitarianism and social equity, with youth often discussing how parents and other socializing agents highly emphasized such messages. In fact, consistent with Crosby’s (1984) personal-group discrimination discrepancy, it is notable that youth touted the idea of egalitarianism and were less quick to identify personal experiences as “discrimination” per se. Although several explanations for this discrepancy have been advanced, the idea that a self-preservation process might be involved is relevant to egalitarianism. Perhaps acknowledging personal incidents of discrimination could threaten perceptions that egalitarianism exists (Brown & Bigler, 2005). It could also be the case that adolescents are still trying to make sense of the idea of racial geometry. During the early adolescent period, explorations and investigations regarding inequities appear to still be shaping adolescents’ societal views, even though they might not be naming such experiences as discrimination per se.
Taken a step further, our analysis suggests that there could be upsides to interrogating whether egalitarian views reflect a true societal reality. Part of the danger in endorsing the notion that “we’re all equal” is that existing inequity could be ignored, downplayed, or denied. Indeed, it is notable that discussion around egalitarianism was prominent in light of the even more prominent themes of stereotypes and unfair treatment. Many youth alluded to the idea and reality of racial hierarchies, and can articulate a sense of unfairness or inequity in school and other domains. Many appeared to speak freely about such issues, suggesting that they are not intentionally avoiding the discussion of race, perhaps because they are not yet fully burdened by cross-group conflicts or taboo in talking about race relations that might be experienced among adults. Assuming the existence of a post-racial society and erasing the meaning of race could be counter-productive in achieving racial equity and social justice (Apfelbaum et al., 2012; Ono, 2010). To act against such processes, adults have an especially strong responsibility in helping youth navigate complex issues of racial-ethnic hierarchies, perhaps by encouraging and modeling a keen egalitarianism awareness. At the same time, there is value in cultural pluralism. Promoting egalitarianism in a way that does not acknowledge or highlight the positive strengths and uniqueness of ethnic/racial groups could also be counter-productive.
Adolescents’ aspirations toward egalitarian approaches to race-ethnicity is also consistent with prior work pointing to the importance of schools and other contexts that communicate values of cultural pluralism and multiculturalism versus color-evasiveness (Byrd & Chavous, 2012). In broader society and within schools, there are benefits to communicating perspectives and worldviews that do not ignore race, but rather appreciate diversity without limiting expectations or relying on stereotypes to define individuals (Hope et al., 2015; Walton et al., 2014). There thus appear to be key opportunities for schools (both broadly speaking as well as with respect to individual and proximal interactions within the school context) to not only promote egalitarianism, but to also combat racial geometry and stereotypical messaging actively by facing it head-on.
Moreover, it seemed clear that, despite desires for egalitarianism and for the way things should be, adolescents often discussed both societal and personal views that reflected a more unequal reality. For example, all adolescents regardless of race-ethnicity talked about egalitarianism in the context of recognizing that the U.S. social system is still far from equal. Adolescents from multiple racial-ethnic groups also expressed rather superficial understanding of social justice movements such as Black Lives Matter or DACA, seemingly exhibiting support for cross-group coalitions while also using their own group’s experiences of success to minimize the struggles of others under the guise of egalitarianism. This surface-level understanding of racial-ethnic issues is consistent with some work suggesting that many adolescents and emerging adults grasp basic concepts of race and systemic racism but struggle with synthesizing more complex nuances related to power, privilege, and social stratification (Johnston-Guerrero, 2016). Hence, there is great meaning and responsibility in moving past the assumption that racism might be a thing of the past and leveraging opportunities for parents, teachers, and other socializing agents to discuss and encourage a true equity lens, particularly among youth of color. If youth do not have a solid understanding of what equity means, then social justice movements might not seem equitable or fair. A critical approach to understanding social hierarchies and an explicit focus on racism is crucial for dispelling stereotypes, reducing prejudice, and promoting positive attitudes toward cultural diversity (Walton et al., 2014; Zirkel, 2008).
Stereotypes and Social Hierarchies
A third theme captured nuanced perspectives on social hierarchies, which were driven by persistent societal stereotypes that were both experienced and perpetuated by youth at times in defense of their own group. Indeed, discussions centering on stereotypes were a prominent theme in all of the focus groups. Regardless of racial-ethnic background, experiences were inundated with stereotypes about one’s group. Youth described feeling constrained by assumptions about their group, and how they had to negotiate these stereotypes within multiple proximal and distal contexts including not only their own families, but also their teachers, peers, as well as society and media (Hughes et al., 2016). Stereotypes were largely conveyed in a negative light and embedded with social positioning perspectives, with White Americans viewed as the dominant, comparison group. According to racial geometry and positioning models (Kim, 1999; Zou & Cheryan, 2017), minoritized groups are pit against each other competing for limited resources by the status quo and broader systems of oppression. Some of these sentiments were confirmed by youth (e.g., awareness of overwhelmingly negative stereotypes toward African Americans and of the model minority myth toward Asian Americans, limited resources of “good” schools). Although youth might not have the jargon or language to describe concepts of racial geometry, their conversations about these issues suggest that they are engaged in the process of learning race-related values and beliefs of society.
Consistent with prior work on stereotypes and adolescent development (Smith & Hope, 2020; Thompson & Kiang, 2010), in the face of such stereotypes, many adolescents discussed their desires to directly work against them, and some also expressed wanting to present their group in the best light possible. In some cases, this took the form of stereotype resistance (e.g., African American youth who wanted to counter stereotypes of underachievement; Chinese American youth who wished to counter stereotypes of being non-athletic). However, in other cases, this took the form of pressure to confirm expectations (e.g., Chinese and Indian Americans living up to the stereotype of the model minority). These patterns also illustrate the idea that, while similar circumstances were experienced across racial-ethnic groups (e.g., stereotypes, bias), the content and nature of such experiences were sometimes unique (see Figure 1).
Although all youth had negative stereotypes ascribed to them, the weight of stereotypes appeared particularly profound among African Americans. The saturation of negative views, of being described as “thugs,” “ignorant,” and “nothing good,” could stem from personal experiences and/or pervasive, negative representations in the media, and seemed to infiltrate adolescents’ own image of themselves and their fellow racial-ethnic group members. As evident from adolescents’ dialogs about such stereotypes, imagery, and labels, they are noticing and integrating what they see in their own beliefs, whether for better or for worse. While youth from other racial-ethnic groups could have had similar feelings that were not outwardly expressed, some African Americans explicitly discussed their avoidance of forming peer networks with those of the same background and instead opted to disassociate oneself from the larger group. Such in-group rejection could be indicative of internalized racism as well as misplaced anger toward peers who might be seen as reinforcing stereotypes. The processes by which youth internalize or resist toxic messages about their group is consistent with prior work and vital to understand, especially given the many school-based and achievement-relevant stereotypes that must be faced (Rogers & Way, 2016, 2018). It is particularly important to remediate these processes within the school context as well as during adolescence, in which social-cognitive capacities, such as perspective-taking and autonomy, accompany increasing awareness of racial-ethnic categories used in society and meaning making around group memberships (Phinney, 2003).
The ubiquity of stereotypes also crept into discrimination encounters. Some of the discussion included vicarious experiences, which can be just as detrimental to youth outcomes as can first-hand experiences of discrimination (Heard-Garris et al., 2018; Tynes et al., 2019). Youth from all four racial-ethnic groups described discriminatory incidents and microaggressions, as well as peers who overtly teased and used racial-ethnic slurs. Within schools, biased treatment from teachers was prevalent, with White students consistently framed as the most well-respected. Such treatment ranged from teachers displaying favoritism within the classroom to unfair discipline practices. While detrimental in and of itself, such perceptions of bias have implications in terms of overall school climate and the educational experience (Hughes et al., 2011; Weeks & Sullivan, 2019). For example, youth who are faced with negative stereotypes about their ability to do well in school could internalize these views and develop feelings of imposter syndrome and maladaptive patterns of John Henryism (Bernard et al., 2020). From an ecological perspective (Bronfenbrenner, 2005), it is important to note that such experiences with bias were perceived in multiple systems—ranging from proximal, interpersonal interactions with peers and teachers to distal influences in the exo- or macrosystems via institutional policies and systemic views on race. Hence, while marginalized youth might experience barriers on multiple levels and dimensions, there could also be opportunities to intervene in multi-pronged ways (Griffith et al., 2019).
Adolescents discussed racial-ethnic hierarchies through societal influences and the media, with the 2016 election and rhetoric around immigrants and racial injustice being particularly salient. The ability for youth to experience trauma through viral online videos that capture nationwide instances of racism makes such encounters particularly troublesome (Tynes et al., 2019). These macrosystemic influences trickled down into the exosystem and microsystem, showing up in interactions among groups/structures with more or less power. Our data suggest that current events can indeed increase opportunities to engage in dialog around race-ethnicity, perhaps building civic engagement in the process (Killen et al., 2011; Ladson-Billings, 1998). For example, some teachers made an attempt to open a space in the mesosystem to process these broader influences in a way that could be helpful for youth understanding.
Future Directions and Limitations
Collectively, our results suggest that messages about diversity, equity, tolerance, group status, social hierarchies, and social justice are embedded in multiple contexts in adolescents’ lives, including family, peer, and school experiences, and engagement with society, media, and current events (Hughes et al., 2016; Killen et al., 2011). Within the school context alone, our results support prior work suggesting that there are many nuanced ways in which schools can foster racial-ethnic perspectives and worldviews, for example, through racial-ethnic diversity (of both individuals as well as of thought), overall climate, and specific interactions with teachers and staff (Byrd, 2019; Kuklinski & Weinstein, 2001). In light of the potential impact of such diverse developmental settings, it is important to continue considering how different contexts might shape racial-ethnic understanding and provide racial-ethnic socialization messages, as well as how contexts might be tailored to specialized areas in adolescents’ lives. For example, youth might learn about socialization themes that are differentially communicated in socially-relevant spaces, such as learning about academic achievement from school teachers and staff, friendship selection and music and style from peers, and cultural pride and how to navigate discrimination from parents (Hughes et al., 2011). Adolescents might find especially important partners through their peers in, together, trying to make meaning of all of these topics and domains.
While the use of focus groups with adolescents from multiple racial-ethnic minoritized backgrounds is notable and unique, well-suiting the exploratory nature of the current study, more in-depth information on perceptions of racial-ethnic equity could have been gleaned from individual interviews. However, our use of focus groups afforded the opportunity to observe adolescent dialog and dynamics in real-time. We also observed potential racial/ethnic differences in the extent to which adolescents elaborated and discussed during the focus groups themselves, with African Americans and Indian Americans seeming to provide more detail overall compared to Chinese and Mexican Americans. While we focused on these specific youth for theoretical and practical reasons, it would be important for future work to extend our understanding to additional perspectives such as those with Southeast Asian or Muslim American backgrounds, who continue to be understudied in developmental research. Another limitation is that we did not explicitly probe for youth’s understanding of equity or racial-ethnic hierarchies, which limits responses for analysis. Our investigation also did not focus on other forms of inequity that could intersect with race-ethnicity (e.g., socioeconomic status, age/grade, gender, sexual orientation, religion). Future research on inequity would do well to consider the multiple and compounding identities of adolescents, particularly using an intersectionality lens (Rogers & Way, 2018).
Implications and Conclusions
Despite these limitations, the results from the current study shed important light in terms of adolescents’ perceptions of where they fit and how they make meaning of the social hierarchy in their schools and in society which, in turn, have deep implications for well-being. Adolescents’ higher self-placements on a perceived social ladder within the school context have been related to lower depressive symptoms and lower obesity, controlling for self-esteem and popularity (Goodman et al., 2001). Our work also speaks to adolescents’ active engagement in processing and understanding equity and social justice. Certainly, the voices in our focus groups speak to the interplay among RES, experiences of discrimination, and racial-ethnic identity, which is in line with conceptual models of critical consciousness, socio-political development, and awareness of social inequity (Anyiwo et al., 2018; Watts et al., 2011). With such awareness, opportunities for ally-ship and cross-group coalition building might be promoted. Moreover, knowledge of intergroup relations can encourage youth to challenge unfair practices that are experienced or observed (Killen et al., 2011). RES messages about social hierarchies can provide useful information about youth’s own levels of prejudice and identify obstacles in developing positive relationships with others (Grapin et al., 2019). Understanding the formation of equity attitudes could bolster healthy relationships and within- and across-group camaraderie. Indeed, RES work has focused on own-group understanding, with less attention toward inter-group relations or how others are involved in awareness of racial-ethnic issues (Hughes et al., 2011; Walton et al., 2014).
Our study provides a vital glimpse into how youth from different sociocultural backgrounds learn, understand, and make-sense of real-world issues related to inequity, racism, and intergroup dynamics. Consistent with proponents of critical race theory, explicitly learning about diversity and racism in the classroom can enable conversations about the history of racism in contemporary society, provide a more sophisticated understanding of race, and honor the lived experiences of minoritized youth (Sykes & Hinger, 2021). The role of teachers and adults in facilitating this process cannot be over emphasized, especially given that social learning theory suggests that adults who model having courageous conversations about race and who teach children about bias, multiculturalism, and democracy can boost relationships and reduce prejudice (Beelmann & Heinemann, 2014). Adults in school have the responsibility of helping youth acquire critical thinking habits, develop effective social interactions, problem solve, and weigh evidence, not only through the official content of what they teach, but also unofficially through social modeling and engagement (or disengagement) with racial-ethnic dynamics.
Young children are inherently interested in and not immune to the way in which race-ethnicity and related inequities play out in the real world. For example, ethnographic studies with White families suggest that children are active participants in their racial-ethnic understanding, often “reproducing” and “reinventing” race-related values and attitudes even in the absence of intentional socialization messages (Hagerman, 2016). Without these meaningful messages, children likely replicate the color-evasiveness that they experience and observe, thereby preventing a deeper understanding of racist systems and structures. Given the opportunities for such understanding to translate into support for civic engagement, social justice, and other positive outcomes, it is crucial to continue unpacking how youth learn from their social contexts and develop perceptions of inequity (and equity) about one’s own group and across other racial-ethnic lines.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors express sincere gratitude to the families who participated in the Promoting Dialogues project and thank the team of research assistants who helped by collecting, transcribing, and coding the data.
Authors’ Note
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding agencies noted below.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The data collection for this study was financially supported by grants from University of North Carolina at Greensboro awarded to Gabriela L. Stein, Laura G. Gonzalez, and Stephanie I. Coard. The preparation of this manuscript was supported, in part, by a postdoctoral fellowship provided by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (T32-HD07376) through the Center for Developmental Science/Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, to Michelle Y. Martin Romero.
