CNN reports that biased racial attitudes begin forming in young children and that American black and white children are both biased toward whites. And, they say they have a scientific survey to back it up.

It goes like this.

An interviewer shows a young white girl illustrations of girls lined up from lightest-skinned to darkest skinned. Then, the interviewer asks her questions like: “Which girl is the smartest?” and “Which one is the good girl?” She points to the lighter-skinned girls. When the interviewer asks, “Which girl is the bad girl?” the little white girl points to the darker-skinned illustrations.

Her mother looks on through a live camera feed and cries. Obviously, scientifically, her sweet little girls is a budding racist. Or is she?

Not so fast.

This poorly crafted survey is an example of what  researchers call a “confounding bias” introduced by how the questions were phrased and how the test was presented. I’m not making any comments about race or racism here. I’m only talking about the validity of the survey from a scientific standpoint, as a way to remind us all to be careful what we accept as “proof” of a particular point of view. Just because people in lab coats stand around with clipboards doesn’t mean it’s science.

In this survey’s case, there are a number of problems:

  • This girl had no option to chose that “none of the children are bad.” She was forced to make a value judgment.
  • Lack of variables. No other visual characteristics like hair color/length, eye color, clothing or even position of light and dark illustrations in the line-up were introduced in the line of questioning. Would the girl have made a different choice if the darker-skinned illustrations where wearing purple dresses and the survey taker’s favorite color happened to be purple? The survey doesn’t rule out these possibilities.
  • Because of the lack of variables introduced, no correlation can be drawn between the girl’s choices and her racial attitudes. It’s scientifically useless.

Since this survey did not introduce any other possible variables – say, asking the same question but with the illustrated children arranged in a different order in the visual, for example – the survey isn’t scientifically conclusive.

But then, why would a black child point to the light-skinned child as being “good” or “smart”?

The survey’s results say that even black children pointed to light-skinned illustrations as being the “good” or “smart” children. How could it be anything but the child reflecting a belief that light-skinned individuals are somehow better then them or, at least, better off socially?

Here’s something else to consider. Children are not able to think abstractly at this young survey-takers’s developmental stage. When she is picking a child out of the line up, she isn’t drawing abstract conclusions about value based on skin color. Quite the opposite, she sees herself as a “good” and “smart” child, so she picks the illustration that “is like me.” (If you watch the video, you’ll see this is the case.)

This survey could just as easily be viewed as a measure of a child’s self-esteem than a test of his/her views on an abstract race construct.  Why would a black child pick a light-skinned illustration as the “good” one? Maybe his or her parents and teachers have sent the dark-skinned child negative self-esteem messages. Therefore, the “good” child is the one that is opposite to them. That’s a self-perception that would fall on the shoulders of parents, teachers, and other influences in the child’s life.

Since the survey didn’t test for these possible variables for the responses it gathered, it’s interesting but scientifically useless. Again, this is not a defense of any kind of racist behavior. But, in the race to call young Americans “racist” I’m just flipping on the yellow light of caution.

Just because this survey is labeled “science” doesn’t mean it’s the genuine article.


Advertisements

Posted by Wildman

Husband. Dad. Pastor. I like to capture moments, pull their threads, and see what unravels. Lead well, read well, think well. And grace. Lots of grace.

2 Comments

  1. Interesting post Wildman. A couple of things though. You mention that there was a lack of other variables in the study which makes it "scientifically useless." But, if I recall correctly, scientific studies often want to eliminate variables (called "nuisance variables") in order to limit the scope of the study and make sure other factors aren't at play. In this case, children were asked to pick the "dumb" child or "ugly" child SIMPLY and ONLY based off skin color. What the study tried to show what the students would decide when color was the ONLY factor. This seems legit.Secondly, I do not think CNN's goal was to show kids as racist nor does the report suggest the children are racist. They simply suggest children may pick up stereotypes from media, other kids, parents, or a myriad of other factors. So your title, "rushes to call kids racist" is hyperbolic.Thirdly, I agree that kids may be picking out children that just share there attributes. But nonetheless, it would still be concerning, for me at least, that children simply chose their own skin color as the "more appropriate" one.Overall, I agree (and I think CNN would agree) that this is not a conclusive study and that any rush to judgments would be..just that.. a rush.

    Reply

  2. Yeah, I agree with you here. The girl picked the one who "looked the most like her" as the good and smart one. Well, duh. Did they think she was going to pick somebody who looked just like her as the bad one? That's simply a kid who knows she's smart and good.I would have felt better about this little test had they not lined the cartoons up lightest to darkest as if one was the good side and one was the bad side. Also, kids will say anything. They will ask their mom why that person is so fat or whether somebody is a man or a woman. If they aren't around a lot of diversity, you better believe they will ask why that person's skin is so dark or light. Kids don't have the filters that adults have learned to have and just because they point out differences does not mean they will be racists (or even, that they are racist.) I wouldn't even blame the media or the parents for that; kids just see the world in black and white (har har. pun not intended) and in this case, the kid that looks like them is good, the kid that doesn't isn't. The end.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s