Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Aug 8.
Published in final edited form as: Child Dev. 2022 May 16;93(3):653–667. doi: 10.1111/cdev.13788

Parent socialization and anti-racist ideology development in White youth: Do peer and parenting contexts matter?

Ciara Smalls Glover 1,#, Fatima Varner 2,#, Kathleen Holloway 2
PMCID: PMC10409607  NIHMSID: NIHMS1908740  PMID: 35575149

Abstract

The development of anti-racist ideology in adolescence and emerging adulthood is informed by parent socialization, parenting style, and cross-race friendships. This study used longitudinal, multi-reporter survey data from White youth and their parents in Maryland to examine links between parents’ racial attitudes when youth were in eleventh grade in 1996 (N = 453; 52% female; Mage = 17.12) and the youths’ anti-racist ideology (acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination and support for affirmative action) 1 year after high school in 1998. This study also examined whether these associations varied based on authoritative parenting and the number of cross-race friendships. Positive parent racial attitudes toward racially and ethnically minoritized populations predicted higher anti-racist ideology in the independent contexts of more cross-race friendships and low authoritative parenting.

Much of the research on racial socialization (i.e., messages about the meaning and significance of race and race relations) and racial ideology among White adolescents and young adults has focused on color-evasive socialization and the reduction of prejudice (Hagerman, 2017). Less is known about the parental attitudes and practices that support the development of anti-racist attitudes in a society that systemically privileges White youth through institutions, policies, and informal practices (Bonilla-Silva, 2018; Spencer, 2006). As the United States becomes more racially and ethnically diverse (US Census Bureau, 2020), it is important to increase our understanding of the socializing influences that lead young people to adopt anti-racist ideologies and behavior (Kendi, 2019; Roberts & Rizzo, 2021). There are many definitions of anti-racism but broadly it includes “forms of thought and/or practice that seek to confront, eradicate, and ameliorate racism” (Bonnett, 2000, p. 3). Multidisciplinary perspectives on anti-racism include ideologies and behaviors that challenge and dismantle structural racism and White supremacy, and promote equality between races (Bonnett, 2006; Kendi, 2019; Paradies, 2016). Although people of all backgrounds pursue anti-racism, White youth may be less likely to do so because they benefit from racial hierarchies (Hazelbaker et al., 2022; Spencer, 2006). Therefore, work on White youth often focuses on factors that contribute to their development of an anti-racist identity (O’Brien, 2009). In this study, we focus on the development of anti-racist ideology among White youth, as beliefs are critical to the development of anti-racist behaviors (Hazelbaker et al., 2022).

Many factors may contribute to White youths’ development of anti-racist beliefs. In particular, parents’ own beliefs and attitudes about race may play an integral role in shaping White youths’ attitudes (Loyd & Gaither, 2018). Yet, White youth do not always internalize their parents’ racial attitudes (Hagerman, 2016), perhaps because their social contexts can also influence how they internalize their parents’ attitudes about race. The broader developmental literature supports the importance of the parenting context in adolescents’ adoption of parent attitudes. Adolescents are typically more likely to internalize parental values when their parents engage in more authoritative parenting, marked by parents’ responsiveness to adolescents’ developmental needs and demandingness, characterized by consistent discipline and appropriate boundaries (Darling & Steinberg, 1993). In addition, authoritative parenting has been associated with the development of empathy and prosocial behavior among adolescents (Leman, 2005), which have been posited as abilities necessary for the development of anti-racist attitudes and action (Hazelbaker et al., 2022).

Youths’ experiences with peers of other races are another important context in shaping their racial attitudes and reinforcing parental socialization about race (Edmonds & Killen, 2009). Cross-race friendships have been linked to positive intergroup attitudes among adolescents (Davies et al., 2011; Tropp & Pettigrew, 2005). They also may influence the intergenerational transmission of racial attitudes (Dhont & Van Hiel, 2012). Furthermore, cross-race friendships can spark conversations about privilege and disadvantage in the United States, leading White youth to question existing inequitable racial processes (Atwell, 2014).

Therefore, in the current study, we: (1) examined the links between parental racial attitudes and White youths’ anti-racist ideology during emerging adulthood; and (2) investigated whether associations between parental racial attitudes during adolescence and anti-racist ideology during emerging adulthood differed by authoritative parenting and the number of close cross-race friendships, as independent moderators. We operationalized anti-racist ideology as an acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination and support for policies to address racial inequities (e.g., affirmative action). White youths’ acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination and support for affirmative action policies signal an understanding of structural racism. According to Hazelbaker et al. (2022), awareness of inequality at the structural level is a critical precursor to anti-racist collective action. We explored the development of anti-racist ideology during the transition to adulthood because of the emphasis on identity development during this developmental period. Furthermore, this stage may set the foundation for anti-racist beliefs and actions throughout adulthood.

Theoretical framework

We used Phenomenological Variant of Ecological Systems Theory (PVEST; Spencer, 2006) to inform this study. According to this theory, “developmental changes in social cognition, multi-level social context character and content, and stage-relevant social experiences … differentially influence meaning making processes across the life course” (Spencer et al., 1997, p. 818). These processes become particularly salient during adolescence because identity formation is a key developmental task. Furthermore, social cognitive abilities develop during this period that help with understanding social relations and hierarchies, including concepts of privilege and stigma (Erikson, 1968; Koski et al., 2015; Spencer, 2006). Adolescents’ increasing ability to understand and integrate the perspectives of others increases the information available to them to make meaning of the world, their social interactions, and their own identities (Spencer et al., 1997). As youth navigate through varied social contexts (e.g., home, school, and community), close others such as peers and parents are essential sources of feedback about the social environment in the recursive processes that shape youths’ cognitions, coping strategies, and identities.

We posit that White youths’ development of anti-racist ideology results from the recursive processes that Spencer (2006) describes. Many White adolescents may not recognize the privileges they receive because those privileges are often unacknowledged or ignored by society. Social feedback from proximal others such as parents and peers can increase awareness of racism among White individuals, prompt reflection on one’s identity, and spur one to actions to help ameliorate inequities (Helms, 1997; Spencer, 2006). White youth can cope with racial inequities with several different coping strategies, including embracing their privilege, ignoring racism, or working to combat racism (Helms, 1997). We hypothesize that the development of anti-racist ideology, in which White youth acknowledge and work to ameliorate racism, is more likely when reinforced by multiple sources that have been found to be related to positive racial attitudes, including parents’ positive racial attitudes, exposure to authoritative parenting, and close friendships with cross-race peers (Atwell, 2014; Pontania & Salim, 2019).

Alongside parents’ reports of their racial attitudes, we also included adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ racial attitudes based on PVEST’s emphasis on adolescents’ subjective experiences and meaning making (Spencer, 2006). Parents’ reports of their racial attitudes may not reflect all of the explicit and implicit messages they give their adolescents. In addition, adolescents’ characteristics, relationships with their parents, and feedback from other contexts such as peer groups, may influence their interpretation and internalization of their parents’ racial attitudes.

Our hypotheses are further informed by a recent developmental model of anti-racism by Hazelbaker and colleagues (2022) that suggests that promotive contexts such as the home (e.g., racial socialization) and peer networks, influence the acknowledgment of structural racism and White privilege which ultimately shape anti-racist action. Whereas that model focused on children and early adolescence, we are extending it to examine longitudinal links between socialization and anti-racist ideology from adolescence into emerging adulthood.

Parent racial attitudes

Parents play a central role in developing their children’s racial beliefs as they are typically the first models to whom children are exposed. A small body of work has examined parental attitudes as contexts for White youth’s racial identity attitudes. In a review of studies investigating parent attitudes among White youth, Loyd and Gaither (2018) defined parental racial attitudes and children’s perceptions of their parents’ attitudes as forms of indirect socialization. Direct socialization, on the other hand, includes explicit statements about race and race relations. Studies examining links between parental racial attitudes and youth racial attitudes and behavior have mixed findings. Some studies find that parental racial attitudes are related to White adolescents’ racial attitudes (Edmonds & Killen, 2009). In contrast, other studies have found that some youth develop racial attitudes that reject or are distinct from those of their parents (Hagerman, 2014, 2020). Direct messages about race have been linked to less bias and stereotyping among White children (Bigler & Wright, 2014). As an example of research that has included both indirect and direct socialization, Hagerman’s (2017) study of White progressive fathers revealed that they had nuanced mechanisms for socializing their children as anti-racist; strategies ranged from the indirect promotion of interracial contact via a diverse school environment to direct socialization about White privilege.

Most work acknowledges that White families heavily rely on indirect socialization and silence around race (Hamm, 2001; Loyd & Gaither, 2018). Colorevasive approaches to race appear to be the most common racial socialization approach in White families (Hagerman, 2014; Loyd & Gaither, 2018). The popularity of indirect socialization and the variation in the role of parents’ attitudes on White youths’ racial attitudes and behaviors support the importance of examining parental racial attitudes. In addition to attitudes about racial out-groups and the significance of race, there is evidence that parents’ racial preferences for their children’s friendships may also be related to White youths’ racial attitudes and behaviors (Mounts et al., 2013). In samples with ethnically diverse adolescents, perceived parent messages and parent attitudes supporting adolescent cross-race friendships predicted adolescent friend selection (Edmonds & Killen, 2009).

Few studies have concurrently examined parents’ and adolescents’ reports of parental racial attitudes (Loyd & Gaither, 2018). Yet, assessing both can inform our knowledge about parents’ attitudes regarding race, and how well parents’ ideologies are communicated or interpreted by adolescents. Understanding how each of these is independently associated with anti-racist ideology over time will provide greater insight into the mechanisms by which White youth internalize their parents’ racial attitudes.

Furthermore, examining the ecological contexts in which White youths adopt their parents’ racial attitudes can help elucidate the mechanisms that inform White youths’ racial ideologies. White American youth live in a society that reinforces a social hierarchy that privileges them (Delgado & Stefancic, 2001), and many societal messages do not support anti-racist ideology and actions. Therefore, it is important to examine multiple contexts, including family and peers, to assess whether White youth are experiencing social feedback that can strengthen links between parents’ positive racial attitudes and youths’ adoption of anti-racist beliefs.

Authoritative parenting and cross-race friendships as contexts

Authoritative parenting

The transmission of parents’ racial attitudes to their children may vary based on parenting style. Parenting style can modify the influence of parents’ domain-specific socialization practices on outcomes for children and adolescents, including their internalization of parents’ values and beliefs (Darling & Steinberg, 1993; Pinquart, 2017). Research studies suggest that adolescents whose parents are responsive to their needs (i.e., warmth and autonomy), explain the reasons for their rules (i.e., democratic-decision making), and provide age-appropriate boundaries (firm control) are more likely to internalize the values of their parents (Patrick & Gibbs, 2012; Pinquart, 2017). Studies have found that adolescents who receive more authoritative parenting are more likely to develop prosocial attitudes (Padilla-Walker et al., 2012). In addition, parents who communicate more with their children are more likely to share their values and beliefs and the reasoning for those beliefs (White, 2000). Research on socialization practices has often found that parenting style moderates the links between parent attitudes and adolescents’ behaviors (Foster et al., 2007; Smalls, 2010). In research on racial-ethnic socialization, Smalls (2010) found that adolescent persistence and academic engagement were highest for the cluster of adolescents that reported the most authoritative qualities (e.g., positive climate, child-centered parenting) and more frequent racial pride and barrier messages. In addition, the links between parents’ health attitudes and adolescents’ eating and physical activity were stronger in authoritative families than in families with parents with other parenting styles (Lenne et al., 2019). Adolescents may be better able to integrate domain-specific socialization (e.g., favorable racial out-group attitudes) when they receive more supportive parenting.

Other researchers, however, have found that more domain-specific socialization can compensate for less authoritative parenting. For example, Cooper and McLoyd (2011) found that among girls who had fewer positive relationships with their mothers, messages about racial barriers were associated with fewer depressive symptoms than among girls who had more positive relationships with their mothers. This suggests that sometimes a domain-specific adaptive parenting practice (e.g., more favorable racial attitudes) can compensate for a less supportive general parenting style (e.g., less authoritative parenting). Direct racial socialization was examined with racially minoritized families in prior work (Cooper & McLoyd, 2011); less is understood about the processes through which the parenting style context operates in the presence of indirect socialization among White youth.

Based on the previous literature suggesting that parenting style can strengthen links between parental attitudes and youth attitudes, we hypothesize that when parents are perceived as high in authoritative parenting during their adolescence, White emerging adults will be more likely to endorse similar racial attitudes as their parents (e.g., parent positive racial out-group attitudes and emerging adults’ anti-racist ideologies). We predicted that White youth who received more authoritative parenting and had parents with more positive racial attitudes would have the highest acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination and endorsement of policies that address racial discrimination (e.g., affirmative action).

Cross-race friendships

In addition, White youths’ cross-race contact with peers, particularly with close friends, may moderate the association between parents’ racial attitudes and youths’ anti-racist attitudes. According to intergroup contact theory (Allport, 1954; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006), more interactions with members of other racial groups, particularly under the conditions of equal status, common goals, cooperation, and support from authority figures, can reduce prejudice and stereotyping and improve intergroup relations. Close cross-race friendships are opportunities for youth to experience long-term, positive interactions with members of other racial groups in conditions where there are common goals, cooperation, and equal status as peers (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). Yet, past research also indicates that close cross-race friendships can be of lower quality and do not always lead to attitude changes regarding race (Aboud et al., 2003; Davies et al., 2011).

White youth may experience more awareness of how societal systems privilege White people and disadvantage minoritized youth from conversations with friends of different races and ethnicities and through observations of their friends’ experiences of racial microaggressions and differential treatment (Atwell, 2014). These experiences also may help them develop empathy toward members of other racial groups and cause them to reflect on actions that they can take to help create more equitable environments. In one study, about one-third of White college students who identified as anti-racists cited that the influence of witnessing or learning about their friends’ racial discrimination experiences prompted them to engage in anti-racism efforts (O’Brien, 2001). In another study of White emerging adults, close cross-race friendships played a pivotal role in the development of anti-racist identities (Atwell, 2014). The ability to have intentional, authentic conversations about race in these friendships appeared to be key to whether White emerging adults were more racially aware in their anti-racist actions.

Previous research suggests that cross-race friendships can reduce prejudice but may not be enough for White youth to develop anti-racist attitudes (O’Brien & Korgen, 2007). Because of the dominance of color-evasive ideology, cross-race friendships may not always lead to in-depth dialogue about race and racism (Atwell, 2014). White youths’ discomfort with race-related disclosures in their cross-race friendships can limit this dialogue (Sanchez et al., 2021). Racial messages from parents and other sources also play a role in White adolescents’ and emerging adults’ adoption of an anti-racist identity (Atwell, 2014; Thomann & Suyemoto, 2017). White youth may be more likely to mature from a color-evasive or nonracist perspective to anti-racist ideology and action with exposure to multiple reinforcing contexts, such as families with favorable attitudes toward racially and ethnically minoritized populations, and positive interactions with racially and ethnically minoritized friends. During adolescence, the friendship contexts of White youth are important to explore as a factor in the association between parental racial attitudes and later anti-racist attitudes. Studies have found that more cross-race friendships were positively associated with support for affirmative action among White college students (Northcutt Bohmert & DeMaris, 2015). Positive cross-race contact could reinforce parents’ values when parents have positive out-group racial attitudes, or counteract parents’ negative racial attitudes. We expected that when adolescents had more close Black friends, positive parental racial attitudes would be associated with a higher acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination and endorsement of affirmative action.

Current study

The purpose of the current study was to examine the relations between White parents’ racial attitudes during their children’s adolescence (as reported by parents and perceived by adolescents) and their children’s later anti-racist ideology during emerging adulthood. We further examined authoritative parenting and cross-race friendships during adolescence as contexts that modified these associations (see Figure 1). This study aimed to address gaps in the literature on the development of anti-racist ideology among White youth, as well as how parental racial beliefs and cross-race friendships help shape White anti-racist attitudes (Loyd & Gaither, 2018; Roberts & Rizzo, 2021). We focus on aspects of anti-racist ideology because youths’ behaviors are often preceded by their awareness and beliefs about racism. A recent model of anti-racism development posits that one’s understanding of self and society is critical to informing anti-racist collective action among White adolescents (Hazelbaker et al., 2022). Identifying processes involved in the development of anti-racist ideology can inform our knowledge about mechanisms that ultimately relate to anti-racist action. The literature on the development of anti-racism among White youth is in a nascent stage (Roberts & Rizzo, 2021); the current study is an initial step to understanding these processes longitudinally.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

Conceptual model of research questions

Our first research question was, how are White parents’ racial attitudes related to their children’s development of anti-racist ideology during emerging adulthood? We hypothesized that parents’ more positive racial attitudes in adolescence would be related to their children’s higher anti-racist ideology during the emerging adulthood. We operationalized positive racial attitudes as higher parent-reported favorable out-group attitudes and lower adolescent-reported parental preference for same-race friends and dating partners.

Our second research question was, do the roles of parent racial attitudes in their children’s anti-racist ideology differ in the contexts of authoritative parenting and cross-race friendships? We hypothesized that links between parents’ racial attitudes and anti-racist ideology during emerging adulthood would be stronger in more authoritative parenting contexts such that for individuals in more authoritative homes, parents’ positive racial attitudes would be associated with higher anti-racist ideology than those whose parents had less positive racial attitudes. Also, among White adolescents who had more (vs. fewer) close Black friendships, parents’ positive racial attitudes were expected to be more strongly associated with higher anti-racist ideology during emerging adulthood. For all hypotheses, we operationalized the development of anti-racist ideology in emerging adulthood as consisting of acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination and support for policies that redress racial discrimination. Because we tested specific directional hypotheses, our analyses were more confirmatory in nature.

METHOD

Participants

Data were from 453 White adolescents (52% female, 48% male; Mage = 17.12) and their primary caregivers (90% female, 10% male; Mage = 44.79) from the Maryland Adolescent Development in Context Study (MADICS). Under 5% of the families identified ethnic group membership (e.g., Irish). Data were from self-administered surveys and interviews when the adolescents were in 11th grade and 1 year after graduating high school. The median family income was $70,000 to $74,999 (range: less than $5000—more than $200,000). In the sample, 34% of the parents completed high school and 20% graduated from college. Among the adolescents, 44.6% reported that they were in college 1 year after graduating high school.

Procedure

The MADICS is a longitudinal study that began in 1991 that focused on the role of social contexts in adolescent development. Seventh graders in one county in Maryland were recruited, along with their primary and secondary caregivers. Follow-up waves were conducted in the summer between seventh and eighth grades (Wave 2), eighth grade (Wave 3), eleventh grade (Wave 4), 1 year after high school (wave 5), 3 years after high school (Wave 6), and into adulthood in 2010 and 2011 (Waves 7 and 8). This study was unique because it was conducted in a very racially and socioeconomically diverse county and included a large number of race-related measures, including racial identity, racial socialization, and other racial attitudes. In addition, the first 5 waves were conducted during a time when there were demographic shifts occurring in the county with increases in the Black population and declines in the White population (DeRenzis & Rivlin, 2007). The county had a majority Black population from 1990 to the present. For this study, we focused primarily on data from Waves 4 and 5 as adolescents went from 11th grade (adolescence) to 1-year post-high school (emerging adulthood). We examined outcomes 1 year after high school.

Measures

Parent racial attitudes

Parental same race friends and dating partners preference assessed adolescents’ perceptions of their parents’ preferences for same-race friendships and dating partners (two items) in 11th grade (r = .63). Items included, “In general, your parents prefer that you hang out with kids of your own race,” and “In general, your parents prefer you date kids of your own race.” Response choices were from 1 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). These items were created for the MADICS. Parents’ racial out-group attitudes (α = .88; three-items) were parent-reported when their adolescents were in 11th grade and assessed parents’ feelings toward racially and ethnically minoritized groups, specifically Black, Asian American, and Hispanic American people, each from 0 (least favorable) to 100 (most favorable) when their children were in 11th grade. These items were modified from the 1964 American National Election Study and have been used in previous studies that examine attitudes and feelings toward political figures and organizations (Liu & Wang, 2015). A sample item included, “how would you rate your feelings toward Black people on a scale from 0 to 100?”

Moderators

Youth’s cross-race friendships were assessed in 11th grade with a single item, “How many of the friends you spend most of your time with are Black?” Response choices were from 1 (none of them) to 5 (all of them) and higher scores indicated more reported cross-race friendships. This item was created for the MADICS. Authoritative parenting was reported by adolescents when they were in 11th grade and focused on their perceptions on how much parents engaged in firm control (e.g., “how often do your parents make sure you know the reasons for their rules”), democratic decision making and psychological autonomy (e.g., my parents encourage me to give ideas & opinions even if we might disagree), and warmth (e.g., your parents spend enough time with you) (seven items; α = .73). Response choices were on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). Scale items were averaged to create a composite variable for authoritative parenting. This scale was developed in the MADICS.

Anti-racist ideology

One year after graduating high school, youth were asked seven questions about their beliefs about anti-Black discrimination (α = .94; e.g., “To what extent are Blacks discriminated against in getting equal pay for equal work?”) on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (a great deal). Higher scores indicated a higher belief that Black people experienced discrimination. A composite variable was created for the measure by averaging scale items. In addition, 1 year after graduating high school, youth were asked about their support for affirmative action. Higher scores for support for affirmative action policies (two items; r = .49) indicated support for racial affirmative action programs on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Items included, “Do you agree or disagree that there should be affirmative action programs to correct for racial or ethnic discrimination?” and “Do you agree or disagree that there should be preference programs to correct for racial or ethnic discrimination?” These items were averaged to create a composite variable. Both of these scales were developed in the MADICS.

Covariates

In addition to the above variables, child gender (0 = male, 1 = female), parent gender (0 = male, 1 = female), parent education (years of school completed), and family income (from 1 = less than $5000 to 25 = $200,000 and above) were included as covariates in our analyses.

Analysis plan

Analyses were conducted in Mplus v.8.4 and two models were conducted to examine predictors in 11th grade. First, path analyses were run to establish links between both parent-reported and adolescent-reported parental racial attitudes and their emerging adults’ anti-racist ideology. Second, the moderators, cross-race friendships and authoritative parenting, were included in the model, variables were centered, and interaction variables between parental racial attitudes and authoritative parenting and between parental racial attitudes and cross-race friendships were created using the define function. Then, path analyses were conducted to determine if cross-race friendships and authoritative parenting moderated the links between parent racial attitudes and their children’s anti-racist ideology. Simple slope analyses were conducted in Mplus v.8.4 to probe any significant interactions at one standard deviation above and below the mean, which were plausible values for our measures (Aiken et al., 1991; Dawson, 2014). A priori power analyses indicated that our sample size was large enough to estimate effects with a power level of .80 and α = .05. Full information maximum likelihood was used to address missing data in the analyses (Arbuckle, 1996). In addition, Little’s MCAR test in SPSS indicated the data were missing completely at random (χ2 = 264.00, df = 228, p = .051). The fit statistics indicated that all models were saturated, χ2(0) = 0, p < .001, comparative fit index = 1.00, Tucker–Lewis Index = 1.00, root mean square error of approximation = .00, 90% CI [.00, .00], standardized root mean square residual = .00.

RESULTS

Descriptive statistics

Correlational analyses were conducted between study variables (Table 1). Eleventh graders who reported that their parents had lower preferences for same-race friends and romantic partners also reported receiving more authoritative parenting in 11th grade and had higher acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination 1 year after high school. In addition, female adolescents reported higher authoritative parenting in 11th grade and lower acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination 1 year after high school. White youth reported lower support for affirmative action programs 1 year after high school when they had parents with more years of education and higher income. Adolescents who had parents with higher education reported that their parents had a lower preference for same-race friends and dating partners in 11th grade. More highly educated parents also reported more favorable racial out-group attitudes.

TABLE 1.

Bivariate correlations between study variables

Variable 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.
1. Parental same-race preference —
2. Racial out-group attitudes (P) −.09 —
3. Cross-racial friendshipsa −.13* −.01 —
4. Authoritative parentinga −.27*** −.03 .03 —
5. Acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination −.17* .10 .02 −.00 —
6. Support for affirmative actiona −.14 .02 .08 .05 .11 —
7. Adolescent gender .03 −.02 −.08 .13* −.15* .13 —
8. Parent gender (P) −.05 .05 .04 −.02 −.03 .04 .03 —
9. Parent edu (P) −.20*** .18** −.08 .08 .11 −.22*** −.09 −.06 —
10. Total income (P) −.02 .03 −.08 .06 .06 −.21** −.09 .06 .40*** —
M 2.25 62.19 2.17 3.61 2.28 2.56 0.52 0.90 14.14 14.51
SD 0.80 16.38 0.86 0.58 0.89 0.99 0.50 0.30 2.61 4.96
Open in a new tab

Note: N = 453. (P) = parent-reported measure. All other measures are adolescent-reported. Adolescent and parent gender were dummy variables with males = 0 and females = 1.

a

These measures were on a scale of 1–5. Racial out-group attitudes were on a scale of 1–100 with higher scores meaning parents had more favorable attitudes toward racially and ethnically minoritized groups. Parental same race preferences were on a scale of 1–4 with higher scores meaning adolescents perceived that their parents had more same-race preferences for their close relationships.

*

p < .05;

**

p < .01;

***

p < .001.

Path analyses

The initial model, which examined the roles of parent and adolescent-reported racial attitudes on anti-racist ideology, explained 5.9% of the variance in beliefs about anti-Black discrimination and 12.2% of the variance in support for affirmative action. Results revealed that lower adolescent-reported parental preference for same-race peers and dating partners in adolescence were related to higher acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination in emerging adulthood (β = −.16, p = .04; Table 2). In addition, lower adolescent-reported parents’ preferences for same-race peers and dating partners in 11th grade were related to higher endorsement of affirmative action in emerging adulthood (β = −.17, p = .02).

TABLE 2.

Regression coefficients

Model 1 Model 2
Pathway B SE β B SE β
Beliefs about anti-Black discrimination ←
 Parent peer preference −.17* .08 −.15* −.17* .08 −.15+
 Parent racial out-group attitudes .004 .004 .07 .004 .004 .08
 Cross-racial friendships — — — .00 .08 .00
 Authoritative parenting — — — .06 .12 .04
 Parent peer preference × cross-racial friendships — — — −.01 .09 −.01
 Parent peer preference × authoritative parenting — — — −.01 .13 −.01
 Parent racial out-group attitudes × cross-racial friendships — — — .01* .01 .19*
 Parent racial out-group attitudes × authoritative parenting — — — −.02** .01 −.23
Support for affirmative action ←
 Parent peer preference −.22* .08 −.18* −.21* .09 −.17*
 Parent racial out-group attitudes .001 .004 .01 .001 .004 .01
 Cross-racial friendships — — — .04 .09 .04
 Authoritative parenting — — — −.02 .13 −.01
 Parent peer preference × cross-racial friendships — — — .03 .10 .02
 Parent peer preference × authoritative parenting — — — −.02 .16 −.01
 Parent racial out-group attitudes × cross-racial friendships — — — .002 .01 .02
 Parent racial out-group attitudes × authoritative parenting — — — .004 .01 .04
Open in a new tab
+

p < .10.

*

p < .05;

**

p< .01.

When interaction terms were included in the model (Figure 2), lower adolescent-reported parental preference for same-race peers and dating partners in adolescence was marginally related to higher acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination in emerging adulthood (β = −.15, p = .05) and significantly related to endorsement of affirmative action in emerging adulthood (β = −.17, p = .03). There was a significant interaction between parents’ racial out-group attitudes and authoritative parenting (β = −.23, p = .004; Figure 3). Among emerging adults who reported lower authoritative parenting, parents’ more favorable racial out-group attitudes were associated with greater acknowledgment of anti-Black racism (b = .01, p = 02); however, there were no significant differences among White emerging adults who received more authoritative parenting. In addition, there was a significant interaction between parents’ racial out-group attitudes and time spent with Black friends (β = .19, p = .03; Figure 4) on beliefs about anti-Black discrimination. Among White emerging adults who reported more close Black friends in adolescence, beliefs about anti-Black discrimination were higher as their parents had more favorable racial out-group attitudes (b = .01, p = .03). The model including interactions explained 14% of the variance in beliefs about anti-Black discrimination and 12.7% of the variance in support for affirmative action.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Open in a new tab

Standardized path coefficients. +p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Open in a new tab

Authoritative parenting as a moderator of the link between parents’ racial out-group attitudes and beliefs about anti-Black discrimination. *p < .05

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Open in a new tab

Number of close cross-race friendships as a moderator of the link between parents’ racial out-group attitudes and beliefs about anti-Black discrimination. *p < .05

DISCUSSION

The purpose of this longitudinal, multi-reporter study was to examine how parents’ racial attitudes were associated with their children’s development of anti-racist ideology in emerging adulthood, as well as the roles of family and peer contexts in modifying these links. As few longitudinal datasets investigate anti-racism, the current study is one of the only to examine processes involved in the development of anti-racism ideology from adolescence into emerging adulthood. Overall, the findings revealed that adolescent-reported parent racial attitudes are a significant predictor of White youths’ anti-racist beliefs in emerging adulthood. Emerging adults reported greater support for affirmative action policies to ameliorate racial disparities when they perceived in 11th grade that their parents had less of a preference for same-race peers and dating partners. These findings are in line with previous studies that found that parents’ racial attitudes were related to their children’s racial attitudes (Edmonds & Killen, 2009). Yet, parent-reported out-group racial attitudes were not directly associated with their children’s anti-racist beliefs in emerging adulthood. Instead, authoritative parenting and cross-race friendships each moderated the associations between parent-reported racial out-group attitudes and White emerging adults’ beliefs about anti-Black discrimination.

The roles of authoritative parenting and cross-race friendships

In contrast to our hypothesis, our findings indicated that in the context of less authoritative parenting, parents’ favorable racial out-group attitudes during their children’s late adolescence were positively associated with their children’s acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination in emerging adulthood. When less authoritative White parents had less favorable attitudes toward racially and ethnically minoritized populations, their emerging adults reported the lowest levels of acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination but as less authoritative parents’ racial out-group attitudes became more favorable, their emerging adult children had higher acknowledgment of the occurrence of anti-Black discrimination. That indirect socialization of positive racial out-group attitudes is positively associated with anti-racist ideology for those low in authoritative parenting supports the small body of work that has found that adaptive domain-specific parenting practices, in this case, more favorable racial out-group attitudes, may be compensatory in the presence of less supportive parenting (Cooper & McLoyd, 2011).

In contrast, among youth who received high levels of authoritative parenting, their moderate acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination did not differ based on their parents’ racial attitudes. These findings may be related to past findings that more authoritative parenting helps youth to develop perspective-taking skills which help them to form more stable opinions independent of their parents’ attitudes (Leman, 2005; Shen et al., 2013). Because parents with higher authoritative parenting grant their children developmentally appropriate levels of autonomy and scaffold their development of decision-making skills, their youth are more likely to develop moral reasoning skills and empathy (Leman, 2005). These moral reasoning skills may afford their children the ability to form their own ideas about race independent of their parents’ racial attitudes.

These moderation results as a whole resemble a protective-stabilizing pattern (Luthar et al., 2000). In this pattern, in the presence of a protective factor (e.g., authoritative parenting) there are no differences in an outcome or competence even in contexts of higher risk (e.g., parents with less favorable racial out-group attitudes). However, in the absence of the protective factor, competence levels are lower in more risky contexts (e.g., parents with less favorable racial out-group attitudes). This pattern is in contrast with our hypothesis that there would be a protective-reactive pattern where youth with more authoritative parents would report significantly higher anti-racist ideology as their parents had more favorable racial attitudes. Yet, protective-stabilizing moderation processes are one of the most common patterns in studies examining the moderating role of family characteristics in youth outcomes (Li et al., 2007; Ozer et al., 2017).

There were also significant interactions between White parents’ racial out-group attitudes and White youths’ level of close Black friendships. In line with expectations, among White youth who had more close Black friendships, parents’ favorable racial out-group attitudes were positively related to acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination. These findings support recent research that receiving socialization from multiple sources that reinforce positive messages about racially and ethnically minoritized populations and promote awareness of racial inequities is important for the development of anti-racist ideology among White adolescents and emerging adults (Thomann & Suyemoto, 2017). In particular, the absence of parents who at least indirectly socialize their youth with positive attitudes toward racially and ethnically minoritized groups may reduce the benefits of close cross-race friendships. Youth may receive mixed messages about race if their close cross-race friendships are not reinforced by socialization in the family or other social contexts. This finding is a critique of the popular belief that cross-race friendships and intergroup contact are sole strategies for developing positive racial attitudes among White youth. Having Black friends alone may not translate into anti-racist behavior in young adulthood. Indeed, some prior studies have found that platonic friendships by themselves often do not significantly relate to later development of anti-racist behavior or ideology (O’Brien, 2009).

Differences by reporter

The links between parents’ general attitudes toward racially and ethnically minoritized populations and emerging adults’ anti-racist attitudes differed based on the family and peer context. In contrast, adolescents’ perceptions of parents’ specific racial preferences about friends and romantic partners did not differ based on context. There could be several reasons for these different associations. It is possible that the associations between adolescent-reported parent racial attitudes and emerging adults’ racial beliefs were significant because these measures had the same reporter. In addition, it is important to note that parents reported their general racial out-group attitudes, whereas adolescents reported their perceptions of their parents’ racial preferences for peers. These different types of measures may relate differently to anti-racist ideology. Parent and child reports of parents’ racial attitudes were not correlated. Previous research with children in earlier developmental stages, supports that children’s perceptions of their parents’ racial attitudes are often not correlated with parents’ reported racial attitudes (Pahlke et al., 2012; Vittrup & Holden, 2011). Studies further support that children’s perceptions of their parent’s racial attitudes are the strongest predictor of their own racial attitudes (Vittrup & Holden, 2011). This study contributes to this literature by providing support that adolescent’s perceptions of their parents’ racial attitudes (rather than their parents’ reports) also are more strongly related to their own racial attitudes later in the life course.

Another possible explanation for the lack of moderation in the presence of adolescent-reported racial attitudes is that youth who indicated that their parents had same-race preferences for friendships and romantic partners may have had parents with more direct messages about race that were less able to be influenced by interracial contact or by a positive parenting environment. In previous studies, parents have been found to be more direct in messaging about their preferences regarding the race of their children’s romantic partners than in their general racial preferences about their children’s friendships (Edmonds & Killen, 2009). Research by Pahlke et al. (2012) also found that children’s out-group attitudes were predicted by their mother’s cross-racial friendships. In the current study, parents’ reports of their racial out-group attitudes, a form of indirect socialization, may not have translated to direct communication about race and race relations with their children. As color-evasive socialization is fairly common in White families (Bonilla-Silva, 2018; Hagerman, 2014; Pahlke et al., 2012), favorable attitudes toward racially and ethnically minoritized groups may not translate to direct messages or activism against racism. Other forms of socialization or other promotive contexts in which youth can discuss historical oppression and systemic racism may be necessary to reinforce parental attitudes.

Based on our findings, we share a critical set of implications. The literature on White racial-ethnic socialization has noted White parents’ resistance to providing explicit racial socialization and their emphasis on color-evasiveness and silence, (Hughes et al 2006; Vittrup, 2018). The discordance we find in parent and adolescent-reported racial attitudes in the current study may reflect what youth have internalized from implicit messages that parents have unknowingly communicated. With this in mind, our findings suggest that youths’ perceptions of parents’ racial attitudes reverberate into their beliefs about structural racism in emerging adulthood. Our study builds on the growing body of literature on White anti-racism beliefs that suggests that White youth must understand their Whiteness and recognize structural racism and social inequality as critical milestones in anti-racism development (Hazelbaker et al., 2022). There are insufficient data on how delays in understanding Whiteness affect anti-racism development to-date, but it is plausible that color evasiveness as a sole strategy may interrupt or prohibit the growth of anti-racism development.

Contextual considerations

While not examined directly, we acknowledge the chronosystem of this study’s participants. It is important to note that in the context of the 1990s in the county of data collection there were changing demographics with increases in Black residents and declines in White residents (DeRenzis & Rivlin, 2007), in a backdrop nationally of increasingly visible Black community activism, protests, and racially salient events such as the Million Man March and the Los Angeles riots in response to police brutality. Research by Forman and Lewis (2015) indicates that more White adults were concerned about race relations in the mid-1990s than in the 1980s or early 2000s. This social context also may have shaped White youths’ perceptions of race in the current study. Even though these data are older, there are some parallels between the time of data collection and present-day U.S. race relations. In 2020, there were many protests under the Black Lives Matter movement in response to police brutality and vigilante violence following the deaths of several Black individuals including George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Breonna Taylor. Unfortunately, racism is still prevalent in U.S. institutions but with the rise of social media and in an unprecedented shutdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, more White Americans than ever reported awareness of racism and inequality (Horowitz et al., 2020). Yet perspectives among White Americans about whether the country should do more to ameliorate racial inequities were largely unchanged from previous years (Horowitz et al., 2020).

Strengths, limitations, and future directions

The current study strengthens our understanding of parental racial attitudes and their role in later anti-racist ideology among White emerging adults through the contexts of parenting and close friendships. We examined factors that contribute to anti-racist ideology (i.e., acknowledging anti-Black discrimination, support for anti-racist policies). The use of a longitudinal, multi-reporter design adds to the literature on anti-racist ideology and allowed us to identify mechanisms across time. It is one of the few studies that have examined how White adolescents’ experiences in adolescence in family and peer contexts are related to anti-racist beliefs in emerging adulthood.

There were several limitations of this study. This study’s measures of anti-racist ideology do not fully capture all aspects of anti-racist ideology. In addition, anti-racist ideology was not linked to critical action in this study. Future research can build on this work by assessing other aspects of anti-racist ideology such as the participant’s awareness of their privileged racial group membership and awareness of historical oppression (Thomann & Suyemoto, 2017). Additionally, future studies can examine specific actions among youth such as protesting against racist practices and policies, divesting from systems that reinforce inequality, donating to organizations that engage in anti-racism efforts, and advocating for anti-racist policies and practices that dismantle White supremacy in institutions.

Anti-racist ideology was directly predicted by adolescent-reported parent racial attitudes but not parent-reported racial group attitudes. Future studies should continue to investigate parent- and child-reported racial attitudes in early adolescence and how those attitudes are influenced by authoritative parenting and cross-race friendships. Parents’ own anti-racist ideology and actions should also be assessed. Furthermore, other sources of racial socialization such as other relatives, teachers, community members, and media should also be considered in future studies (Byrd, 2017; Lewis, 2003). Including these other sources of socialization may help explain more of the variance in acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination and support for affirmative action as our model explained 14% and 12.7% of the variance in our outcomes, respectively. As identity development is a recursive process, receiving consistent messages from multiple environments that (a) reinforce awareness of how society privileges White people and disadvantages members of racially and ethnically minoritized groups, and (b) support actions to address these inequities, may accumulate and further the development of anti-racist ideologies (Spencer, 2006).

Some of our measures refer more broadly to minoritized groups (e.g., parents’ racial out-group attitudes and youths’ support for affirmative action), whereas other measures only refer to attitudes about or experiences with Black people (e.g., close cross-race friendships and acknowledgment of anti-Black discrimination). There does not appear to be a pattern in the study findings based on this distinction. Still, parental attitudes toward different racial and ethnic groups can vary and in turn, parental messages about each minoritized racial and ethnic group may not be the same. Furthermore, White Americans’ support for policies such as affirmative action may differ depending on which social group they perceive as beneficiaries (Bell, 2021; Eberhardt & Fiske, 1994). With this in consideration, future studies might explore in more depth how parental racial attitudes and socialization about specific racial and ethnic groups are related to youths’ attitudes about the same groups.

Future research is encouraged to build on the foundation of the current findings by collecting data that measure aspects of anti-racist ideology and action over time from childhood into adulthood. Future latent profile analyses would allow for an investigation of synergy among dimensions of anti-racist ideology. In addition, future research that examines the role of parents’ racial attitudes and anti-racism in the context of specific parenting practices (e.g., firm control, warmth) could provide more insight into how the parenting context influences the intergenerational transmission of racial attitudes.

CONCLUSION

In this paper, we explored whether the contexts that are traditionally associated with positive development (e.g., peers and parents) also serve as contexts that are associated with anti-racism components. Our findings suggest that during the transition from adolescence into emerging adulthood, White parents’ racial attitudes and perceived racial preferences are related to youths’ development of anti-racist ideology that includes acknowledging racism and supporting policies to address racism. White adolescents’ perceptions of parents’ racial preferences were directly related to their support of affirmative action in emerging adulthood. This study suggests that White youths’ perceptions of their parents’ racial attitudes can shape their own racial attitudes and preferences to act against racism as adults. Authoritative parenting can support perspective-taking and in turn, lead to adolescent attitudes that are more resistant to less favorable parent racial attitudes (Leman, 2005; Shen et al., 2013). In less supportive family environments, parents’ racial attitudes contribute to their children’s racial attitudes in emerging adulthood. Parent socialization is a powerful tool in shaping childhood beliefs that persist into adulthood (Hagerman, 2020; Pahlke et al., 2020). White parents’ racial attitudes can be reinforced by contexts such as cross-race friendships that can increase youths’ awareness of racial inequities. Yet, our findings suggest that higher cross-race contact without additional contextual support is not enough for White youth to develop anti-racist attitudes. Practitioners working with adolescents and emerging adults should consider how the different contexts these populations navigate may support or counter socialization toward anti-racist ideology and action.

FUNDING INFORMATION

Fatima Varner was supported by grant, P2CHD042849, awarded to the Population Research Center at The University of Texas at Austin by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Population Research Center at The University of Texas at Austin by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Grant/Award Number: NICHD P2CHD042849

Abbreviations:

MADICS

Maryland Adolescent Development in Context Study

PVEST

Phenomenological Variant of Ecological Systems Theory

REFERENCES

  1. Aboud F, Mendelson M, & Purdy K. (2003). Cross-race peer relations and friendship quality. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27(2), 165–173. 10.1090/01650250244000164 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Aiken LS, West SG, & Reno RR (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage. [Google Scholar]
  3. Allport GW (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison Wesley. [Google Scholar]
  4. Arbuckle JL (1996). Full information estimation in the presence of incomplete data. In Marcoulides GA & Schumacker RE (Eds.), Advanced structural equation modeling: Issues and techniques (pp. 243–277). Psychology Press. [Google Scholar]
  5. Atwell AC (2014). When “being down” isn’t enough: Examining White anti-racism and racial integration in the era of colorblindness [Masters thesis, Georgia State University]. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/sociology_theses/48 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bell E. (2021). Deserving to whom? Investigating heterogeneity in the impact of social constructions of target populations on support for affirmative action. Policy Studies Journal, 49(1), 268–299. 10.1111/psj.12347 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bigler RS, & Wright YF (2014). Reading, writing, arithmetic, and racism? Risks and benefits to teaching children about intergroup biases. Child Development Perspectives, 8(1), 18–23. 10.1111/cdep.12057 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bonilla-Silva E. (2018). Racism without racists: Colorblind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in America (5th ed.). Rowman & Littlefield. [Google Scholar]
  9. Bonnett A. (2000). Anti-racism. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  10. Bonnett A. (2006). The Americanisation of anti-racism? Global power and hegemony in ethnic equity. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 32(7), 1083–1103. 10.1080/13691830600821778 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Byrd CM (2017). The complexity of school racial climate: Reliability and validity of a new measure for secondary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(4), 700–721. 10.1111/bjep.12179 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooper SM, & McLoyd VC (2011). Racial barrier socialization and the well-being of African American adolescents: The moderating role of mother–adolescent relationship quality. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 895–903. 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00749.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Darling N, & Steinberg L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 487–496. 10.1037/0033-2909.113.3.487 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Davies K, Tropp LR, Aron A, Pettigrew TF, & Wright SC (2011). Cross-group friendships and intergroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 332–351. 10.1177/1088868311411103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Dawson JF (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 1–19. 10.1007/s10869-013-9308-7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Delgado R, & Stefancic J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York: University Press. [Google Scholar]
  17. DeRenzis B, & Rivlin AM (2007). A pathway to the middle class: Migration and demographic change in Prince George’s County. Brookings Greater Washington Research Program. [Google Scholar]
  18. Dhont K, & Van Hiel A. (2012). Intergroup contact buffers against the intergenerational transmission of authoritarianism and racial prejudice. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 231–234. 10.1016/j.jrp.2011.12.008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Eberhardt JL, & Fiske ST (1994). Affirmative action in theory and practice: Issues of power, ambiguity, and gender versus race. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 15(1–2), 201–220. 10.1080/01973533.1994.9646078 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Edmonds C, & Killen M. (2009). Do adolescents’ perceptions of parental racial attitudes relate to their intergroup contact and cross-race relationships? Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12, 5–21. 10.1177/1368430208098773 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Erikson EH (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. W. W. Norton & Company. [Google Scholar]
  22. Forman TA, & Lewis AE (2015). Beyond prejudice? Young whites’ racial attitudes in post–civil rights America, 1976 to 2000. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(11), 1394–1428. 10.1177/0002764215588811 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Foster SE, Jones DJ, Olson AL, Forehand R, Gaffney CA, Zens MS, & Bau JJ (2007). Family socialization of adolescent’s self-reported cigarette use: The role of parents’ history of regular smoking and parenting style. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 32, 481–493. 10.1093/jpepsy/jsl030 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Hagerman MA (2014). White families and race: Colour-blind and colour-conscious approaches to white racial socialization. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37, 2598–2614. 10.1080/01419870.2013.848289 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Hagerman MA (2016). Reproducing and reworking colorblind racial ideology: Acknowledging children’s agency in the White habitus. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 2, 58–71. 10.1177/2332649215594817 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Hagerman MA (2017). White racial socialization: Progressive fathers on raising “antiracist” children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79, 60–74. 10.1111/jomf.12325 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Hagerman MA (2020). Racial ideology and White youth: From middle childhood to adolescence. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 6, 319–332. 10.1177/2332649219853309 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Hamm JV (2001). Barriers and bridges to positive cross-ethnic relations. Youth & Society, 33(1), 62–98. 10.1177/0044118X01033001003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Hazelbaker T, Brown CS, Nenadal L, & Mistry RS (2022). Fostering anti-racism in white children and youth: Development within contexts. American Psychologist. Advance online publication. 10.1037/amp0000948 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Helms JE (1997). Toward a model of White racial identity development. In Altbach PG, Arnold K, & King IC (Eds.), College student development and academic life: Psychological, intellectual, social and moral issues (pp. 49–66). Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  31. Horowitz J, Parker K, Brown A, & Cox K. (2020). Amid national reckoning, Americans divided on whether increased focus on race will lead to major policy change. Pew Research. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hughes D, Rodriguez J, Smith EP, Johnson DJ, Stevenson HC, & Spicer P. (2006). Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for future study. Developmental psychology, 42(5), 747. 10.1037/0012-1649.42.5.747 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Kendi IX (2019). How to be an antiracist. One World. [Google Scholar]
  34. Koski JE, Xie H, & Olson IR (2015). Understanding social hierarchies: The neural and psychological foundations of status perception. Social Neuroscience, 10, 527–550. 10.1080/17470919.2015.1013223 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Leman PJ (2005). Authority and moral reasons: Parenting style and children’s perceptions of adult rule justifications. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 265–270. 10.1177/01650250544000044 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Lenne RL, Joyal-Desmarais K, Jones RE, Huelsnitz CO, Panos ME, Auster-Gussman LA, Johnson WF, Rothman AJ, & Simpson JA (2019). Parenting styles moderate how parent and adolescent beliefs shape each other’s eating and physical activity: Dyadic evidence from a cross-sectional, US National Survey. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 81, 76–84. 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.06.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Lewis AE (2003). Race in the schoolyard. Rutgers University Press. [Google Scholar]
  38. Li ST, Nussbaum KM, & Richards MH (2007). Risk and protective factors for urban African-American youth. American Journal of Community Psychology, 39(1), 21–35. 10.1007/s10464-007-9088-1/ [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Liu M, & Wang Y. (2015). Data collection mode effect on feeling thermometer questions: A comparison of face-to-face and Web surveys. Computers in Human Behavior, 48(1), 212–218. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.057 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Loyd AB, & Gaither SE (2018). Racial/ethnic socialization for White youth: What we know and future directions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 59, 54–64. 10.1016/j.appdev.2018.05.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Luthar SS, Cicchetti D, & Becker B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Development, 71(3), 543–562. 10.1111/1467-8624.00164 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Mounts NS, Karre J, & Kim H-S (2013). Mothers’ attitudes about and goals for early adolescents’ cross-ethnic peer relationships: A qualitative analysis. Family Relations, 62, 312–325. 10.1111/fare.12008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Northcutt Bohmert M, & DeMaris A. (2015). Interracial friendship and the trajectory of prominority attitudes: Assessing intergroup contact theory. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 18, 225–240. 10.1177/1368430214550342 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. O’Brien E. (2001). Whites confront racism: Antiracists and their paths to action. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  45. O’Brien E. (2009). Fromanti-racismtoanti-racisms. Sociology Compass, 3(3), 501–512. 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2009.00206.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. O’Brien E, & Korgen KO (2007). It’s the message, not the messenger: The declining significance of Black–White contact in a “colorblind” society*. Sociological Inquiry, 77, 356–382. 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2007.00197.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Ozer EJ, Lavi I, Douglas L, & Wolf JP (2017). Protective factors for youth exposed to violence in their communities: A review of family, school, and community moderators. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 46(3), 353–378. 10.1080/15374416.2015.1046178 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Padilla-Walker LM, Carlo G, Christensen KJ, & Yorgason JB (2012). Bidirectional relations between authoritative parenting and adolescents’ prosocial behaviors. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22, 400–408. 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2012.00807.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Pahlke E, Bigler RS, & Suizzo MA (2012). Relations between colorblind socialization and children’s racial bias: Evidence from European American mothers and their preschool children. Child Development, 83(4), 1164–1179. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01770.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Pahlke E, Patterson MM, & Hughes JM (2020). White parents’ racial socialization and young adults’ racial attitudes: Moral reasoning and motivation to respond without prejudice as mediators. Group Processes & Intergroup, 24(8), 1409–1426. 10.1177/1368430220941065 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  51. Paradies Y. (2016). Whither anti-racism? Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39(1), 1–15. 10.1080/01419870.2016.1096410 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Patrick RB, & Gibbs JC (2012). Inductive discipline, parental expression of disappointed expectations, and moral identity in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41, 973–983. 10.1007/s10964-011-9698-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Pettigrew TF, & Tropp LR (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. 10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Pinquart M. (2017). Associations of parenting dimensions and styles with internalizing symptoms in children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. Marriage & Family Review, 53, 613–640. 10.1080/01494929.2016.1247761 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  55. Pontania AR, & Salim RMA (2019). The relation of child’s empathy and parents’ prejudice: The mediating role of parenting style. Humaniora, 10, 105–112. 10.21512/humaniora.v10i2.5476 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Roberts SO, & Rizzo MT (2021). The psychology of American racism. American Psychologist, 76(3), 475. 10.1037/amp0000642 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Sanchez KL, Kalkstein DA, & Walton GM (2021). A threatening opportunity: The prospect of conversations about race-related experiences between Black and White friends. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122, 853–872. 10.1037/pspi0000369 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Shen Y-L, Carlo G, & Knight GP (2013). Relations between parental discipline, empathy-related traits, and prosocial moral reasoning: A multicultural examination. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 33, 994–1021. 10.1177/0272431613479670 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Smalls C. (2010). Effects of mothers’ racial socialization and relationship quality on African American youth’s school engagement: A profile approach. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(4), 476–484. 10.1037/a0020653 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Spencer MB (2006). Phenomenology and ecological systems theory: Development of diverse groups. In Lerner RM & Damon W. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 829–893). John Wiley & Sons Inc. [Google Scholar]
  61. Spencer MB, Dupree D, & Hartmann T. (1997). A Phenomenological Variant of Ecological Systems Theory (PVEST): A self-organization perspective in context. Development and Psychopathology, 9(4), 817–833. 10.1017/S0954579497001454 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Thomann CRB, & Suyemoto KL (2017). Developing an anti-racist stance: How White youth understand structural racism. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 38(6), 745–771. 10.1177/0272431617692443 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Tropp LR, & Pettigrew TF (2005). Relationships between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups. Psychological Science, 16, 951–957. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01643.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. US Census Bureau. (2020). National population by characteristics: 2010–2019. The United States Census Bureau. Retrieved April 30, 2021, from https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-national-detail.html [Google Scholar]
  65. Vittrup B. (2018). Color blind or color conscious? White American mothers’ approaches to racial socialization. Journal of Family Issues, 39(3), 668–692. 10.1177/0192513X16676858 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  66. Vittrup B, & Holden GW (2011). Exploring the impact of educational television and parent–child discussions on children’s racial attitudes. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 11(1), 82–104. 10.1111/j.1530-2415.2010.01223.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  67. White FA (2000). Relationship of family socialization processes to adolescent moral thought. The Journal of Social Psychology, 140(1), 75–91. 10.1080/00224540009600447 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES