CULTIVATING HEALTHY ETHNIC-RACIAL IDENTITY DEVELOPMENT AMONG  
INFANTS AND TODDLERS THROUGH JUSTICE-BASED ETHNIC-RACIAL 
SOCIALIZATION 

By 

Anissa L. Eddie 

A DISSERTATION 

Submitted to 
Michigan State University 
in partial fulfillment of the requirements 
for the degree of 

Human Development and Family Studies – Doctor of Philosophy 

2025 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ABSTRACT 

This dissertation examines the critical role of ethnic-racial socialization (ERS) in the 

early development of ethnic-racial identity (ERI) among infants and toddlers, with a focus on the 

transformative potential of justice-based ethnic-racial socialization (JBERS). While systems 

must be held responsible for the systemic racism that is deeply embedded in the social structures 

of the United States and perpetuated through both historical and contemporary practices, there is 

a role for accountability and intervention at the individual level as well. The early childhood 

period, particularly infancy and toddlerhood, presents a unique opportunity to engage caregivers 

and children in meaningful practices that can disrupt the development of harmful ethnic-racial 

biases and promote racial justice.  

A key contribution of this work is the exploration of the literature on ethnic-racial 

awareness in the earliest stages of life. The existing literature primarily focuses on older children 

and often overlooks infants and toddlers, with limited attention given to the role of caregivers in 

fostering healthy ERI during the formative years of birth to age 3. This gap is addressed in a 

scoping review (Study 1) which synthesizes the current state of research on ethnic-racial 

awareness among children from birth to age 3. Study 1 identifies the need for more diverse, 

inclusive research that incorporates Multiracial populations and highlights the 

underrepresentation of toddlers in studies of ethnic-racial identity development, especially given 

the significance of this period in the emergence of self-awareness. Further, Study 1 demonstrates 

the need for more research on the ethnic-racial socialization practices among caregivers of 

infants and toddlers using validated measures. 

Building on these findings, Study 2 introduces two new measures designed to assess 

caregivers' capacity to engage in JBERS with infants and toddlers. These measures focus on the 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
ERI beliefs that caregivers of infants and toddlers hold and ERS practices in which caregivers of 

infants and toddlers engage. These new measures offer a means of evaluating the potential for 

JBERS interventions. Study 2 contributes to the field by providing tools to assess how caregivers 

can be better equipped to support healthy ERI development in young children. 

Taken together, the two studies inform the development of the Reciprocal Healthy 

Ethnic-Racial Identity Development (RHERID) model. Future research should build upon the 

findings of this dissertation to examine associations between JBERS delivery and infant/toddler 

outcomes among diverse ethnic-racial groups and within varying cultural contexts. Ultimately, 

this work underscores the importance of intentionally engaging in JBERS early as one aspect of 

the multimodal approach required to dismantle systemic racism and contribute to the broader 

pursuit of racial equity and social justice in the United States. 

Keywords: ethnic-racial socialization, ethnic-racial identity, infant/toddler, caregiver 

practices, racial justice 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Copyright by 
ANISSA L. EDDIE 
2025 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
This dissertation is dedicated to my younger self. To that “little part,” thank you for not letting 
me forget you and for helping me understand how to give you what you need. I have learned so 
much from our Sankofa journey together. I’m amazed at your wisdom and grateful for your 
resilience. I believe that many children will benefit from this work – work that you motivated 
and informed. I’m deeply appreciative and hope you can relax knowing you are safe and loved.  
I got us now.  

v 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

I am deeply grateful to my mentors, colleagues, friends, and family for their unwavering 

support throughout this Ph.D. journey. There is no way I could have arrived at this point without 

my vast systems of support. First, I want to acknowledge the individuals who encouraged me to 

go to college after high school and opened my eyes to my own academic potential: To Melissa 

Kamara Liggins for giving me the Entrada brochure during my 11th grade math class; to Jacque 

Fields for mothering so many of us through undergrad; to Stephanie Diepstra, who went above 

and beyond as an advisor; to Dr. Lissa Schwander, who seeded my love of macro work. All of 

you helped to launch me at a critical time in my personal development. 

To everyone who generously had conversations with me about what it might look like to 

go back to school after 14 years in the field: Dr. Brandy Lovelady Mitchell, Dr. Regis Fox, Dr. 

Marlene Kowalski-Braun, Dr. Daniel Williams, Dr. Joe Kuilema, and my bestie, Dr. Gihane 

Jérémie-Brink. I also want to thank Michigan State University for awarding me the University 

Enrichment Fellowship. This fellowship enabled me to fully commit to the pursuit of my 

doctoral degree while also prioritizing my personal wellbeing and that of my family. 

To my phenomenal advisor and dissertation chair, Dr. Claire Vallotton: You reassured 

me that we would find a way and then proceeded to walk with me at every step. You pushed and 

challenged me in all the best ways and pulled me back to reality when needed. You also 

extended me grace, support, and flexibility through all the unexpected circumstances that came 

my way these past five years. I can’t imagine doing this without you. Many, many thanks. 

To my fabulous dissertation committee members, Dr. Holly Brophy-Herb, Dr. Deborah 

Johnson (aka Auntie Deb), Dr. Iheoma Iruka, and my late but vital addition, Dr. Ryan Bowles. 

Your guidance, encouragement, and support have been invaluable. To Emily Jensen: I knew you 

vi 

 
 
 
 
 
 
were going to be important from the moment you offered to be my stats buddy during our first 

semester. I’m so grateful that we have been able to take turns falling apart and supporting each 

other. What a gift it has been to be next to you on this wild ride. I will forever be impressed by 

the philosopher that you are, and I will always think of you and smile when I hear rare and 

interesting vocabulary words! 

I want to thank all the caregivers who took my survey and the many people who helped 

me with recruitment. Because of your partnership, I was able to reach my recruitment goals and 

collect meaningful data. I also want to thank the scholars who reviewed my draft measures and 

provided feedback: Dr. Chelsea Delan-Williams, Dr. Charisse Pickron, Dr. Onnie Rogers, Dr. 

Iheoma Iruka, and Dr. Cristia Spears-Brown. 

To my friends/framily: There are too many to list, but if you are reading this, it is pretty 

safe to assume you are one of them! For all the big and small ways you all have supported me 

and Team Eddie, I truly thank you. To my therapist, there are not enough words to express my 

thanks. So, to you, I offer the deepest bow of gratitude. 

To my precious boys, Malachi, Nehemiah, and Josiah: When I started this journey in 

2020, we were all doing “zoom school” at home. Thank you for your patience as we found our 

way together. You three are my greatest joy and biggest inspiration. I love you forever and 

always, no matter what! I also need to give a shout-out to my daughter, Toffee, the sweetest pup 

and the best writing support animal I know. 

Finally, to Jermale: You have been the most incredible partner throughout this journey. 

You are my loudest cheerleader, my fiercest supporter, and my safest home. Thank you, Babe. 

My love for you is endless. 

vii 

 
 
 
 
 
Originally, I did not include my mother or my maternal grandparents in these 

acknowledgements. Much of my research on ethnic-racial identity development and socialization 

has advanced in spite of them, not because of them, but my mom died 5 days before I defended 

my dissertation, and as my own ERI continues to develop through ongoing reflection, I want to 

offer this revision to my acknowledgements.  I thank my grandmother who celebrated all of my 

academic accomplishments, told me to never stop writing, and was my constant refuge. I thank 

my grandfather who was able to move through his hardened racial beliefs to show me, my 

husband, and my children enduring love. And to my mother: All the ways she was able to mother 

me and all the ways she was not, have helped to make me who I am today. She did her best. I 

thank her, and I wish her nothing but peace.   

viii 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PREFACE 

As a Black identifying, biracial woman with African American and Euro-American 

heritage, I approach this research with a personal history of complex ethnic-racial identity 

development. Although my phenotypic features are more Black presenting than white, the 

cultural context of my upbringing was exclusively white, and I did not grow up having consistent 

relationships with the African American side of my family. My personal journey has inspired my 

desire to pursue this line of research in order to inform policy and practice that cultivates 

inclusive mindsets, promotes radical self-love, and disrupts the development of ethnic-racial bias 

in early childhood.  

This dissertation is a product of my deep commitment to understanding and addressing 

systemic racism, particularly within the context of early childhood development in the United 

States. As a researcher and as an individual committed to racial equity, I was drawn to the 

intersection of ethnic-racial identity (ERI) development and ethnic-racial socialization (ERS) 

because I believe that the early years of life provide a powerful opportunity to foster healthy 

ethnic-racial identities and inclusive, justice-based mindsets. It is my hope that this work will 

contribute to a broader conversation about how racial inequities manifest and can be resisted at 

individual and systemic levels. 

Throughout this dissertation, I have intentionally made a number of decisions that reflect 

my theoretical stance and the values that underpin this research. One key choice that may stand 

out is my decision not to capitalize the term "white" in reference to racial identity. This choice is 

aligned with the scholarship of Matias et al. (2014) and Hawkman (2020), both of whom argue 

that capitalizing "white" in language contributes to the normalization and dominance of 

whiteness in society. By not capitalizing “white,” I intend to symbolically challenge white 

ix 

 
 
 
 
 
supremacy as it is entrenched not only in our social systems but also in our language. This 

decision is not one of carelessness or oversight, but rather a deliberate effort to provoke thought 

and highlight the ways in which language can perpetuate harmful structures of power. 

It is my hope that the findings of this dissertation contribute not only to the academic 

community but also to the persistent efforts to resist hate, dismantle injustice, elevate human 

connectedness, and strengthen the movement toward collective liberation. 

x 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK........................1 
Introduction..........................................................................................................................1 
Literature Review................................................................................................................2 
Theoretical Frameworks......................................................................................................7 
Justice-Based Ethnic-Racial Socialization with Infants and Toddlers..............................11 
Directions for Future Research..........................................................................................17 
REFFERENCES................................................................................................................19 

CHAPTER 2: STUDY 1 – MAPPING RESEARCH ON EARLY ETHNIC-RACIAL 
AWARENESS DEVELOPMENT AMONG INFANT AND TODDLERS: A SCOPING  
REVIEW........................................................................................................................................26 
Introduction........................................................................................................................26 
Method...............................................................................................................................28
Findings.............................................................................................................................37
Discussion..........................................................................................................................46 
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................52 
APPENDIX A: SCOPING REVIEW SEARCH STRATEGY.........................................56 
APPENDIX B: SCOPING REVIEW INCLUDED PAPERS...........................................59 

CHAPTER 3: STUDY 2 – JUSTICE-BASED ETHNIC-RACIAL SOCIALIZATION  
AMONG CAREGIVERS OF TODDLERS: INITIAL MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT  
TO EXAMINE BELIEFS AND PRACTICES..............................................................................67 
Introduction........................................................................................................................67 
Ethnic-Racial Socialization in Early Childhood................................................................70 
Present Study.....................................................................................................................75 
Method...............................................................................................................................76 
Results................................................................................................................................84 
Discussion........................................................................................................................107 
REFERENCES................................................................................................................111 
APPENDIX A: ITEM ADAPTATION...........................................................................119 
APPENDIX B: UPDATED RECRUITMENT FLYER..................................................122 
APPENDIX C: DEMOGRAPHIC ITEMS .....................................................................123 
APPENDIX D: ETHNIC-RACIAL IDENTITY AWARENESS AND LEARNING  
(ERIAL) SCALE……………………………………………………………………….126 
APPENDIX E: EARLY ETHNIC-RACIAL SOCIALIZATION PRACTICES  
(EERSP) SCALE……………………………………………………………………….127 
APPENDIX F: ETHNIC IDENTITY SCALE................................................................129 
APPENDIX G: COLORBLIND IDEOLOGY MEASURE……………........................131 
APPENDIX H: FEAR OF DISCUSSING RACE MEASURE.......................................132 
APPENDIX I: PREJUDICE CONCERNS MEASURE..................................................133 

xi 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX J: DIGITAL-SCREEN EXPOSURE QUESTIONNAIRE (DSEQ) 
FOR YOUNG CHILDREN……………………………………………………….…....134 

CHAPTER 4: INTEGRATED DISCUSSION............................................................................136 
Introduction......................................................................................................................136 
Summary of Study Findings............................................................................................137 
Reciprocal Healthy Ethnic-Racial Identity Development Model....................................140 
Future Directions for Research........................................................................................142 
Implications for Policy and Practice................................................................................143 
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................144 
REFERENCES................................................................................................................146 

xii 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 

Introduction 

Systemic racism encompasses the myriad ways in which both historic and current race-

based oppression perpetuate a constructed social order that values whiteness/lighter skin and 

devalues Blackness/darker skin (Escayg, 2020). Often operating with invisible complexity, it is 

interwoven throughout all social systems in the United States resulting in barriers to accessing 

equitable housing, health care, education, financial services, environmental safety, and judicial 

fairness (Braveman et al., 2022; Iruka et al., 2020). Systemic racism is one of the most 

detrimental problems in the context of the U.S. (Braveman et al., 2022; Feagin, 2013; Kendi, 

2019), and implementing sustainable solutions will require numerous, multidimensional 

approaches primarily at the macro systems level. Yet micro system efforts and individual 

contributions are also needed (Holmgren, 2017).  

Because social systems are comprised of and maintained by individuals, intervention at 

the individual level must be incorporated into the approaches to combat systemic racism 

(Meltzoff & Gilliam, 2024; Jemal & Bussey, 2022). At the individual level, work can start in the 

earliest years of life through intentional socialization processes and continue across the life span 

(Meltzoff & Gilliam, 2024; Williams et al., 2020). The early childhood period provides a unique 

opportunity for intervention at the individual level, for both children and caregivers, through 

justice-based ethnic-racial socialization (JBERS), a new concept explained further below. 

Starting the proactive work of JBERS with infants and toddlers provides opportunities to foster 

healthy ethnic-racial identity (ERI) development (e.g., having awareness of and positive regard 

for one’s ERI and processing the nuances of what it means in a racialized society) and disrupt the 

emergence of harmful biases within the earliest stages of development (Bigler & Liben, 2007). 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
Further, caregiver engagement in JBERS with infants and toddlers can also evoke self-reflection 

and the ongoing evolution of their own ERI (Rogers et al., 2020).  

I posit that JBERS is both developmentally relevant for infants and toddlers and 

impactful for their adult caregivers as it offers an individual level intervention that positions both 

young children and their caregivers to resist systemic racism through the adoption of positive 

regard toward self and radical empathy toward others. Caswell and Cifor define radical empathy 

as “a willingness to be affected, to be shaped by another’s experience, without blurring the lines 

between the self and the other...empathy is radical if it critically and consciously shifts existing 

power relations in favor of those who are marginalized” (Arroyo-Ramírez et al., 2021, p. 3). 

However, our current understandings of developmentally relevant JBERS for our youngest 

learners is limited due to having very few ERS studies that include infants and toddlers in their 

samples and a lack of studies that examine ethnic-racial socialization (ERS) beliefs and practices 

among their caregivers. 

What is Ethnic-Racial Identity?      

Literature Review 

ERI comprises the ways in which one perceives, describes, and values their personal 

ethnic-racial group membership (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014), and how individuals define their 

sense of self based on the ethnic and racial backgrounds with which they feel affiliated (Williams 

et al., 2020). This felt affiliation can be expressed through the ways in which individuals label 

themselves, and the behaviors they connect to their ethnicity and race. Certain beliefs and 

attitudes can also be associated with ethnic-racial group membership (Umana-Taylor et al., 

2014). While many aspects of ethnicity and race are socially constructed, the ways in which 

individuals internalize their meaning are real and often deeply personal (Hughes et al., 2006, 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
Umaña-Taylor et al., 2015). How each person describes and experiences their own ethnic-racial 

identity is not inherent but rather learned through socialization processes and exposure to 

different sociocultural contexts (Meltzoff & Gilliam, 2024; Williams et al., 2020).   

Studying Racial Identity Development Among African American Children 

Initial considerations of how young children conceptualize race gained prominence in 

social commentary and academic literature through the historic legal case of Brown vs the Board 

of Education (Bergner, 2009). Used in the case, the work of Drs. Kenneth and Mamie Clark 

demonstrated that African American (Black) children perceived Euro-American (white) children 

as possessing desirable traits such as intelligence, kindness, and beauty, at higher rates in 

comparison to Black children (Bergner, 2009). These finding suggested that separating African 

American and Euro-American children in educational settings caused emotional harm for the 

African American children and prevented them from truly having an equal education in 

comparison to their Euro-American peers (Bergner, 2009).  

The Clarks’ study sparked others to explore how children come to recognize and assign 

meaning to the construct of race through various processes of socialization (Hughes et al., 2006). 

Racial socialization research initially focused on the exploration of parenting practices specific to 

African American populations in the United States (Hughes et al., 2006; Hughes & Chen, 1997; 

Lesane-Brown, 2006). Given the racialized context that umbrellas the experiences of African 

Americans, many African American parents incorporate intentional messages into their child-

rearing practices that are meant to prepare their children to navigate life within dominant culture 

and instill personal pride in their individual racial and cultural identities (Blanchard et al., 2019, 

Hughes et al., 2006; Williams et al., 2022).  

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
An acclaimed 2006 review by Hughes and colleagues elevated four primary themes 

within racial socialization of African American children: cultural socialization, preparation for 

bias, promotion of mistrust, and egalitarianism (Blanchard et al., 2019; Hughes et al., 2006). 

Cultural socialization emphasizes the teaching of pride in one’s history and heritage (Hughes et 

al., 2006). Preparation for bias focuses on explaining the function of stereotypes and 

discrimination (Hughes et al., 2006). Promotion of mistrust stresses the need for caution within 

interracial interactions. And egalitarianism concentrates on rejecting stereotypes and teaching 

children that all racial groups are equal. While egalitarianism is often an important message for 

African American children and children of color to receive, egalitarianism can easily become 

defined by silence and color evasive approaches among white populations and other privileged 

groups (Gallagher, 2015; Hughes et al., 2006). 

The Emergence of Ethnic-Racial Socialization as a Construct  

The literature expanded beyond African American populations to also address the 

experiences of other minoritized ethnic and racial groups such as those with Latiné, Asian, 

African, or Caribbean ancestry (Hughes et al., 2006; Phinney, 1989). The practice of using the 

combined term, ‘ethnic-racial socialization’ (ERS), is relatively new. Previously, racial 

socialization and ethnic socialization were discussed in the literature as separate constructs 

(Barnes, 1980; Bowman & Howard, 1985; Spencer, 1983). The term racial socialization was 

primarily used to describe the process of socializing Black/African American children, and 

ethnic socialization was used in reference to socialization within Latiné and Asian families 

(Hughes et al., 2006; Lesane-Brown et al., 2005). In 2008, Dr. Hazel Markus posited that race 

and ethnicity are inherently intertwined in how they relate to the understanding of individual 

identity and sociocultural contexts (Markus, 2008). The term ethnic-racial socialization is 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
reflective of this expansion, and both terms are often used in overlapping ways (Hughes et al., 

2006). Many current scholars have moved toward use of the combined term, ethnic-racial 

socialization, to encapsulate the entirety of the construct (Doucet et al., 2018; Umaña-Taylor et 

al., 2014). 

This unified perspective was affirmed in 2014 by the Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 

21st Century Study Group (Rivas-Drake et al., 2014) and has since become standard in academic 

literature (Quintana, 1998; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014; Yip, 2018). Some scholars also reverse 

the order using the phrase racial-ethnic socialization with the intention of centering and elevating 

race as the primary factor of import (Christophe et al., 2022). Both semantic choices 

acknowledge the interconnectedness of race and ethnicity in relation to social identities and 

outcomes.  

Today, ERS refers to the messages that children receive regarding ethnicity and race 

(Hughes et al., 2006; Quintana, 1998). These messages come from caregivers (e.g., parents, 

families, and educators), environments (e.g., home, neighborhood, school, geographic region), 

and media (e.g., books, toys, television, and technology tools; Williams et al. 2020). Through 

these socializing agents, children learn about common norms, values, and customs that may be 

related to both their own ERI and that of others (Hughes et al., 2006). Like all aspects of 

socialization, ERS is influenced by the many social environments (e.g., schools, community, 

peers) in a child’s life (Bronfenbrenner, 1995; García Coll et al., 1996; Spencer et al., 1997). 

However, caregivers (referring to all primary caregivers of young children including parents, 

family members, close community members, and educators) are typically the principal source of 

socialization messages in early childhood (Loyd & Gaither, 2018; White-Johnson et al., 2010). 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The Connection Between ERI and ERS 

The ways in which ERI emerges and evolves is a developmental process that aligns with 

the cumulative skills and capacities that young children gain over time. For example, infants 

typically have the visual and cognitive capacity to distinguish between same and other-race faces 

and attend to novelty in the people and experiences to which they are exposed (Hayden et al., 

2009; Kelly et al., 2005; Liu et al., 2015; Zubler et al., 2022). By 2 years old, children have a 

sense of themselves as a unique individual with social identity group affiliations (Rochat, 2003; 

Waxman, 2021). By age 3, children use color names for skin tones and start identifying race as a 

factor for categorization (Aboud, 2013; Katz, 2003; Nesdale & Flesser, 2001). By 5 years old, 

children often express a bias toward whiteness and show different attitudes toward members of 

their own racial group and those in racial outgroups (Kinzler & Spelke, 2011; Raabe & 

Beelmann, 2011). While it is innate for infants and toddlers to notice and make meaning of 

observable differences among others, the development of harmful attitudes and exclusionary 

biases based on ethnicity and race is not innate, but rather the outcome of socialization (Bar-Haim 

et al., 2006; Bigler & Liben, 2007). Thus, there are opportunities to influence the development of 

these attitudes and biases through ERS practices.   

In the United States, ERS tends to perpetuate the social construction of race that is based 

broadly on ethnic-racial heritage and observable phenotypic features such as skin color, eye 

shape, and hair texture (Quintana, 1998; Rogers et al., 2020) While all children are subject to 

some level of ERS within the U.S context, intentional engagement in ERS is most common 

among families with minoritized identities who often see ERS as a means of passing down 

cultural pride messages and preparing their children for expected ethnic-racial bias (Hughes et 

al., 2006).  

6 

 
 
 
 
 
Recognizing the universal nature of children receiving ERS messages from a wide variety 

of socializing agents, it is important to distinguish how the nature of the ERS messages will 

directly impact how children conceptualize ethnicity and race and develop their personal ERI 

(Meltzoff & Gilliam, 2024; Jemal & Bussey, 2022). ERS messages are never neutral. Rather, 

they can either perpetuate or disrupt oppression and systemic racism (Meltzoff & Gilliam, 2024; 

Jemal & Bussey, 2022). Following the non-neutrality of ERS, JBERS refers to a specific 

approach to ERS that integrates a color conscious ideology with a social justice framework.  

JBERS messages focus on acknowledging the historic events that enabled the 

colonization and oppression of targeted communities of color along with the current mechanisms 

that promote and sustain white dominance. JBERS messages encourage individuals to discover 

and reflect on their own intersectional identities with the goals of understanding their personal 

history, honoring their individual dignity within the interconnectedness of shared humanity, and 

identifying their unique positionality and responsibility in relation to advancing anti-racism and 

social justice.  

Theoretical Frameworks 

Grounded in the frameworks of bioecological systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), the 

Integrative Model for the Study of Developmental Competencies in Minority Children (García 

Coll et al., 1996), a phenomenological variant of ecological systems (Spencer et al., 1997), and 

culture as a microsystem (Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017), the lifespan model of ethnic-racial identity 

posits that ERI development is a dynamic process that spans all developmental stages from 

infancy through adulthood (Williams et al., 2020). Based on this model, humans are innately 

primed to develop an awareness of ethnicity and race in infancy along with a base understanding 

of their own ethnic-racial affiliation, often facilitated by ERS (Katz, 2003; Williams et al., 2020). 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
As young children grow, these understandings expand and the dimensions of ethnic-racial 

attitudes, behaviors, and knowledge begin to evolve (Branch & Newcombe, 1986; Rogers et al., 

2021; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014). While a key driver of ERI development, ERS is not the only 

influence.  

The dynamic nature of the lifespan model is demonstrated by how ERI development can 

vary in response to what the lifespan model refers to as individual factors, contextual factors, and 

identity relevant experiences (Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017; Williams et al., 2020). The lifespan 

model defines individual factors as, “factors to which society attaches social meaning” and thus 

they “elicit socializing scripts that are specific to the child” (Williams et al., 2020, p. 6). 

Examples of individual factors include racialized features (e.g., skin color), and assigned gender 

at birth (Williams et al., 2020). Contextual factors could include parental socioeconomic status, 

birthplace, and current sociopolitical events (Williams et al., 2020). Identity relevant experiences 

refer to any experience that directly impacts the way one perceives their ethnic-racial identity, 

from being the target of ethnic-racial discrimination to attending a school that integrates anti-bias 

education (Williams et al., 2020).  

This array of factors contributes to the development of ERI, yet ERS is one of the few 

factors that caregivers of young children can directly impact. The JBERS approach is best suited 

to cultivate what I refer to as healthy ERI (i.e., ERI that entails ongoing reflection on 

intersectional identities with the goals of understanding personal history, honoring individual 

dignity, and identifying the positionality and responsibility everyone has in relation to advancing 

anti-racism and social justice). Given the fact that ERI begins to develop in infancy, JBERS 

should also start there.  

8 

 
 
 
 
 
The infancy and early childhood phases of the lifespan model address the dimensions of 

ethnic-racial priming, ethnic-racial awareness, and ethnic-racial affiliation. Ethnic racial priming 

acknowledges the unique period in infancy when babies have the potential to be responsive to a 

wide range of socialization factors and contexts (Kinzler, 2013; Williams et al., 2020). In 

connection to ERS, ethnic-racial awareness describes how individuals come to notice ethnic-

racial groups as categories and make meaning of how ethnic-racial groups are perceived in 

society (Bigler & Liben, 2007; Williams et al., 2020). Ethnic-racial affiliation indicates how 

individuals come to understand themselves as belonging to one or more ethnic-racial categories 

or ingroups (Katz & Barrett, 1997; Nesdale et al., 2004; Williams et al., 2020). Positioned within 

these three initial phases of the lifespan model, ERS can be considered any identity relevant 

experience that is delivered to infants and toddlers through both implicit and explicit means 

(Williams et al., 2020). Infants and toddlers then leverage their socio-cognitive capacities to 

receive, and make meaning of ERS messages (Williams et al., 2020). The theoretical 

underpinnings of socio-cognitive capacity development can be understood through the lenses of 

Piaget’s theory of cognitive development (Piaget, 1971). The internalization and re-construction 

of the socializing messages can be understood through Vygotsky’s Sociocultural theory 

(Vygotsky & Cole, 1978).   

Cognitive Development 

Piaget’s theory of cognitive development posits that children continuously construct 

knowledge and make meaning of information through exploration of and engagement with their 

world (Berk, 2021). According to Piaget’s theory, infants and toddlers first operate in the 

sensorimotor period which is characterized by the infants' use of input gained through their 

senses and movements to construct meaning (Berk, 2021). Initially, infants demonstrate 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
awareness of sensory input and later leverage that awareness to accomplish sorting tasks 

(Chamberlain, 1999; Berk, 2021). Later, toddlers absorb information based on their ability to 

reflect that which is mirrored by the adults with whom they interact (Gergely & Unoka, 2008).  

As toddlers process ERS information received from their environments and experiences, 

they begin to organize this information in ways that help them make sense of their own ERI and 

that of others (Bar-Haim et al., 2006; Kelly et al., 2005). The extent of this meaning making is 

expanded as children advance in their socio-cognitive development over time and influenced by 

the people and environments to which they are most frequently exposed (Gaither et al., 2012; 

Heron-Delaney et al., 2017; Kelly et al., 2009; Xiao et al., 2018). Piaget's theory further connects 

to the lifespan model as the individual factors and local current context (described in the lifespan 

model as social identities and social environments respectively) influence how young children 

mentally adapt their understandings of their own and others’ ethnic-racial identities to make 

sense of what they see happing around them, thus allowing their cognition to better represent the 

world as they observe it (Berk, 2021). Again, ERS is a prime contributor to this process (e.g., 

Katz, 2003). 

Sociocultural Theory 

 The lifespan model is also aligned with Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory which focuses 

on how children come to understand their culture through social interactions (Thomas, 2005; 

Vygotsky & Cole, 1978). These interactions are especially meaningful when they are with others 

who are more knowledgeable or skilled than the child (Shabani et al., 2010). Children look to 

these models for examples of how to think and behave according to their community’s cultural 

norms and values (Thomas, 2005). As children absorb this cultural learning (often through ERS), 

what they observe, and experience becomes what they think and do (Berk, 2021). This relates to 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
the identity relevant experiences aspect of the lifespan model which refers to experiences that 

evoke awareness and evaluation of one’s ethnic-racial identity (i.e., ERS; Williams et al., 2020). 

Taken together, the lifespan model, cognitive development theory and sociocultural theory 

provide a strong conceptual foundation from which to consider ERS among infants and toddlers. 

Justice-Based Ethnic-Racial Socialization with Infants and Toddlers 

Developmental Relevance of ERS with Infants and Toddlers 

Previous literature has begun to examine the ERS beliefs (options and values associated 

with ERS) that caregivers of young children express, and the practices (strategies for delivering 

ERS) that they engage in. Yet, this research has primarily focused on children ages 3 and older 

(Branch & Newcombe, 1986; Phinney, 1989; Stevenson, 1995; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014). It 

was once thought that ethnicity and race were not salient to children until the preschool years 

(Nesdale, 1999); however, there is a growing body of evidence to the contrary (Fassbender et al., 

2012; Hayden, 2012; Katz, 2003; Pickron et al., 2017), including evidence that by 3 years old, 

children begin to demonstrate ethnic-racial bias (e.g., Dunham et al., 2013, Katz, 2003 Murray & 

Mandata, 2002). In response to this evidence, extending the cultivation of healthy ERI to the 

developmental stage of birth to age 3 is essential. Doing so will support the cultivation of 

positive self-regard and inclusive mindsets toward others during the critical early years while 

also disrupting the development of harmful ethnic-racial bias.  

The long-term impact of JBERS is also promising as healthy ERI has been associated 

with higher academic achievement, and improved health among adolescents from minoritized 

backgrounds (Rivas-Drake et al., 2014). Additionally, as caregivers engage in JBERS with 

infants and toddlers, I hypothesize that caregivers are continuing their own ERI development. 

For example, as caregivers participate in JBERS practices, they may be prompted to reflect on 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
the ERS messages they have previously received. Experiences that may not have held significant 

meaning at the moment they occurred may be reconsidered upon reflection and thus take on new 

meaning, adding more complexity and nuance to the caregiver’s perspective on their own ERI 

(Williams et al., 2020), and greater understanding of their own ERS. I posit that this reciprocal 

process invites children and caregivers to actively participate in dismantling systemic racism 

starting on the micro level in the earliest years of childhood. 

Proposed Reciprocal Ethnic-Racial Identity Development (RERID) Model 

Using the lifespan model of ethnic-racial identity as the overarching premise, the 

proposed model of reciprocal ethnic-racial identity development (RERID; see Figure 1) 

integrates cultural ecological frameworks (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, 1979; García Coll et al., 1996; 

Spencer, 2006; Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017), cognitive developmental theory (e.g., Piaget, 1971), 

and sociocultural theory (e.g., Vygotsky, 1978). From the lifespan model of ethnic-racial 

identity, four dimensions are particularly relevant to the proposed model: individual factors, local 

current context, the ethnic-racial priming period, and identity relevant experiences (Williams et 

al., 2020).  

Organization of the RERID Model 

The following section describes the elements of the RERID model and their organization. 

First, RERID recognizes the individual factors people are born with such as skin color, hair 

texture, sex organs, and phenotypic features that are often affiliated with social constructs that 

carry systemically assigned meaning. Further, RERID acknowledges the ways in which social 

constructs can promote or inhibit access to specific contextual environments. Thus, the model 

displays both the child and the adult caregiver as passing through individual factors before 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
connecting to the ways in which each contributes to the reciprocal ethnic-racial identity 

development outcomes pictured in the middle of the model.  

The ways in which infants and toddlers contribute to the process are identified as socio-

cognitive capacity starting as basic environmental awareness in early infancy and progressing 

downward in the table through developmental processes including perceptual narrowing, self-

related processes (“What children know about their own ethnicity-race, their attitudes, 

evaluations, and feelings about their ethnic-racial group”; Rogers et al., 2021, p. 7), and other-

related processes ("The ways that children use ethnic-racial information to make categorizations 

and evaluations of, and comparisons to others”; Rogers et al., 2021, p. 7) in alignment with 

ongoing development through later infancy and the toddler years. Similarly, the caregiver 

contributions to the process are identified as socialization factors that start with environmental 

context that influences infant awareness and progresses through exposure, mirroring, and 

modeling. Similarly, the caregiver contributions to the process are identified as socialization 

factors that start with environmental context that influences infant awareness and progresses 

through exposure, mirroring, and modeling. All infant/toddler and caregiver contributions are 

understood as occurring within numerous levels of cultural context (e.g., home, community, and 

sociopolitical).  

The cultural contexts are visualized as a background spiral to represent the influence of 

culture at the microsystem level with both proximal and distal integration across all levels of 

ecological systems. Finally, the double headed arrows represent the ongoing, reciprocal nature of 

the visualized process. Ethnic-racial identity development outcomes are directly influenced by 

the contribution of both infant/toddler socio-cognitive development and caregiver socialization 

factors. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 1 

Reciprocal Ethnic-Racial identity Development (RERID) Model 

While infants and toddlers experience the natural trajectory of their social-cognitive 

development, they continue to expand and deepen their own ERI. At the same time, caregiver 

engagement in the process of contributing socialization factors may directly influence the 

continuous development of their own ERI. 

RERID Model Connections with the Lifespan Model and Theoretical Frameworks  

There are countless factors that impact the social and identity development of young 

children (Berk, 2021). These factors include a complex and dynamic combination of innate 

biology and contextual environments (Berk, 2021). In considering infancy as the initial period of 

the lifespan model, the biological aspects that infants bring to their own developmental processes 

are prominent (Bigler & Liben, 2007; Njoroge et al., 2009). Mere moments after birth, infants 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
can display the physical capacity to suck, swallow, grasp, root, hear, move, and so on (e.g., 

Njoroge et al., 2009). Their inborn cognition is also apparent. The ways that they can distinguish 

and turn toward familiar voices and communicate needs by crying are just two examples of the 

socio-cognitive connections that can be observed immediately after birth (Berk, 2021; 

Chamberlain, 1999). And this capacity grows exponentially within the first year of a child’s life 

(Berk, 2021; Njoroge et al., 2009). Piaget’s developmental cognitive theory describes the ways 

in which infants take in and organize new information through their senses and the input they 

receive through motor functions (Berk, 2021; Miller, 2016). 

Cognitive-development theory posits that children continuously construct knowledge and 

make meaning of information through exploration of and engagement with their world (Berk, 

2021). The sensorimotor period described by Piaget aligns with the cognitive capacity and skills 

reflected in the RERID model (Berk, 2021).   

As infants’ cognitive skills continue to advance, their contextual environments become 

more influential (Berk, 2021). As Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems theory reflects, there 

are many interactive contexts that influence a child’s development (Miller, 2016; Thomas, 2005). 

Although the infant can pursue innumerable developmental paths, their environmental context 

begins to create boundaries and influence direction (Berk, 2021). Over time, infants begin to lose 

the ability to recognize and differentiate sounds of language, characteristics of facial features, 

and other things that they are not regularly exposed to in their environment (Krasotkina et al., 

2018). This process of perceptual narrowing can inform preferences that may evolve into biases 

(Bigler & Liben, 2007). Thus, the importance of ethnic-racial diversity within contextual 

environments becomes crucial (Berk, 2021).  

15 

 
 
 
 
 
The impact of contextual environments on the development of infants and toddlers is also 

highly influenced by culture. Vélez-Agosto and colleagues offer a useful extension to 

bioecological systems theory by positioning culture as a proximal, embedded micro system 

(notated as the background spiral in the RERID model), rather than a distal macro element 

(Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017). In this revision of Bronfenbrenner’s theory culture is defined as 

having a vital role in creating and influencing microsystems and thus directly impacting human 

development processes in a central way (Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017). Daily activities and 

interactions are deeply dependent on cultural norms and practices (Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017). As 

a result, universal developmental influences such as family, neighborhood, and educational 

settings; are never entirely homogeneous (Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017). The RERID model posits 

that this perspective differentiates both the developmental processes of infants and toddlers and 

the socialization practices of the adults who care for them in accordance with cultural contexts.  

Caregivers bring socialization responses that work in reciprocal relationship with the 

contributions of infants and toddlers (Bigler & Liben, 2007). Caregivers introduce salience based 

on the environmental contexts they curate which cultivates familiarity among infants and 

toddlers based on exposure (Fitzgerald et al., 2009). They offer modeling through the attitudes 

and behaviors they display in front of infants and toddlers. Mirroring is displayed through the 

ways they directly engage with infants and toddlers in response to the child’s various social 

identities (Rogers et al., 2021). 

The RERID model makes space for aspects of ethnic-racial identity development to 

scaffold one another across the lifespan while also acknowledging the unique aspects that are 

typically housed within each developmental period. As the lifespan model exemplifies, the 

development of ethnic-racial identity does not occur in any one developmental period or 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
environmental context. Rather, it dynamically extends across the full continuum of a lifetime 

(Williams et al., 2020). The full scope of ethnic-racial identity cannot be understood apart from a 

lifespan perspective, and the lifespan perspective cannot be understood apart from in-depth 

examinations of how it functions within specific developmental periods and particular 

environmental contexts.  

The proposed RERID model compliments the lifespan model by offering a detailed 

framework that applies to the lifespan model’s first developmental stage. The RERID model also 

complements the lifespan model with its presentation of socialization as a reciprocal process that 

is relevant across the lifespan. Providing a thorough examination of ethnic-racial identity 

development and socialization within this early developmental period also serves to strengthen 

the foundational knowledge on which the rest of the continuum relies. Alongside frameworks 

that address other stages of the lifespan model, the RERID model can support ongoing research 

and inform practical applications. 

Directions for Future Research 

While leading scholars have successfully elevated ERS research with adolescents, 

elementary age students, and preschoolers (Hughes et al., 2006; Neblett Jr. et al., 2012; 

Quintana, 1998; Rivas-Drake et al., 2014; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014), the literature on caregiver 

delivered ERS with infants and toddlers remains scarce. In response, it is important to examine 

what is known about the developmental relevance of ethnicity and race among infants and 

toddlers in order to better prepare parents and others to understand when and how they can 

effectively deliver JBERS. Further, there is a need to explore the beliefs that caregivers of 

ethnically-racially diverse infants and toddlers hold regarding ERS (e.g., Do they take a color 

evasive approach to ERS, or a JBERS approach?), and the explicit ERS practices they 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
intentionally engage in with the children in their care. Both efforts could ultimately be used to 

create educational supports for families, early educators, and others to engage in JBERS from the 

earliest and most malleable point in a child’s life.   

Conclusion 

Systemic racism and Western dominance aid the development of harmful biases and 

perpetuate systems of oppression (Braveman et al., 2022; Iruka et al., 2020). These concepts are 

embedded in implicit and explicit socialization practices and evidence of their harm is clear even 

among young children (Harris-Britt et al., 2007; Meltzoff & Gilliam, 2024; Perszyk et al., 2019). 

The devastating consequences that arise from systemic racism, fear, and hate must be confronted 

from multiple angles. As individuals and systems work to unlearn misinformation and 

operationalize equity in adulthood, caregivers of young children can engage by proactively 

supporting the learning journeys of the children in their care with intention and urgency (Jemal 

& Bussey, 2022).  

Given the complexity and magnitude of this mandate, there is no such thing as starting 

too early. Thus, further exploration of how infants and toddlers come to notice and make 

meaning of ethnic-racial differences is vital. Additionally, there is a need to develop deeper 

understanding of how adult caregivers of infants and toddlers think about ERS, what ERS 

practices they engage in, and how they can be equipped to cultivate healthy ERI among young 

children as part of a multidimensional pursuit of racial equity and social justice.   

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
REFERENCES 

Aboud, F. E. (2013). What are they thinking? The mystery of young children’s thoughts on race. 

In Navigating the social world: What infants, children, and other species can teach us 
(1534281887; 2013-12218-061; pp. 332–335, Chapter xxiii, 424 Pages). Oxford 
University Press, New York, NY. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199890712.003.0061 

Arroyo-Ramírez, E., Jones, J., O’Neill, S., & Smith, H. (2021). An introduction to radical 

empathy in archival practice. Journal of Critical Library and Information Studies, 3(2), 
Article 2. https://doi.org/10.24242/jclis.v3i2.171 

Bar-Haim, Y., Ziv, T., Lamy, D., & Hodes, R. M. (2006). Nature and nurture in own-race face 

processing. Psychological Science, 17(2), 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
9280.2006.01679.x 

Barnes, E. J. (1980). The Black community as the source of positive self-concept for Black 

children: A theoretical perspective. Black Psychology, 2(1), 106–130. 

Bergner, G. (2009). Black children, white preference: Brown v. board, the doll tests, and the 

politics of self-esteem. American Quarterly, 61(2), 299–332. 

Berk, L. E. (2021). Infants, children, and adolescents, 9th Edition. 

https://www.pearson.com/content/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/us/en/higher-
education/program.html 

Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2007). Developmental intergroup theory: Explaining and reducing 
children’s social stereotyping and prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological 
Science, 16(3), 162–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00496.x 

Blanchard, S. B., Coard, S. I., Hardin, B. J., & Mereoiu, M. (2019). Use of parental racial 

socialization with African American toddler boys. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 
28(2), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1274-2 

Bowman, P. J., & Howard, C. (1985). Race-related socialization, motivation, and academic 

achievement: A study of Black youths in three-generation families. Journal of the 
American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 24(2), 134–141. 
http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/S0002-7138(09)60438-6 

Branch, C. W., & Newcombe, N. (1986). Racial attitude development among young black 

children as a function of parental attitudes: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study. 
Child Development, 57(3), 712–721. 

Braveman, P. A., Arkin, E., Proctor, D., Kauh, T., & Holm, N. (2022). Systemic and structural 
racism: Definitions, examples, health damages, and approaches to dismantling. Health 
Affairs, 41(2), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2021.01394 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press. 

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future 

perspective. In Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human 
development (pp. 619–647). American Psychological Association. 
https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-018 

Caswell, M., & Cifor, M. (2016). From human rights to feminist ethics: radical empathy in the 

archives. Archivaria, 81(1), 23–43. 

Chamberlain, D. B. (1999). Babies are not what we thought: Call for a new paradigm. Journal of 

Prenatal & Perinatal Psychology & Health, 14(1/2), 127–144. 

Christophe, N. K., Stein, G. L., Kiang, L., Johnson, N. C., Jones, S. C. T., Stevenson, H. C., 

Anyiwo, N., & Anderson, R. E. (2022). A 21st century take on racial-ethnic socialization: 
Patterns of competency and content among diverse parents of color. Social Sciences, 
11(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11020088 

Doucet, F., Banerjee, M., & Parade, S. (2018). What should young Black children know about 

race? Parents of preschoolers, preparation for bias, and promoting egalitarianism. Journal 
of Early Childhood Research, 16(1), 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X16630763 

Dunham, Y., & Degner, J. (2013). From categories to exemplars (and back again). In Navigating 

the social world: What infants, children, and other species can teach us (pp. 275–280). 
Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199890712.003.0050 

Escayg, K.-A. (2020). Anti-racism in U.S. early childhood education: Foundational principles. 

Sociology Compass, 14(4), e12764. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12764 

Fassbender, I., Lohaus, A., Thomas, H., Teubert, M., Vierhaus, M., Spangler, S. M., Kolling, T., 

Goertz, C., Graf, F., Lamm, B., Gudi, H., Freitag, C., Keller, H., Knopf, M., & 
Schwarzer, G. (2012). Association learning with own- and other-race faces in three- and 
six-month old infants—a longitudinal study. Infant and Child Development, 21(4), 325–
337. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.756 

Feagin, J. (2013). Systemic racism: A theory of oppression. Routledge. 

Fitzgerald, H. E., Mann, T., Cabrera, N., Sarche, M., & Qin, D. (2009). Development of infants 

and toddlers in ethnoracial families. Infant Mental Health Journal, 30(5), 425–432. 
https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20222 

Gaither, S. E., Pauker, K., & Johnson, S. P. (2012). Biracial and monoracial infant own-race face 

perception: An eye tracking study. Developmental Science, 15(6), 775–782. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01170.x 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Gallagher, C. A. (2014). Color-blind egalitarianism as the new racial norm. In K. Murji & J.  
Solomos (Eds.), Theories of race and ethnicity: contemporary debates and  
perspectives (pp. 40–56). chapter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139015431.006    

Gallagher, C. A. (2015). Color-blind egalitarianism as the new racial norm. Theories of race and 

ethnicity: Contemporary debates and perspectives, 40-56. 

García Coll, C., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., & Vázquez 
García, H. (1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in 
minority children. Child Development, 67(5), 1891–1914. 

Gergely, G., & Unoka, Z. (2008). Attachment, affect-regulation, and mentalization: The 

developmental origins of the representational affective self. In Social Cognition and 
Developmental Psychopathology (pp. 305–342). Oxford University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780198569183.003.0011 

Harris-Britt, A., Valrie, C. R., Kurtz-Costes, B., & Rowley, S. J. (2007). Perceived racial 

discrimination and self-esteem in African American youth: Racial socialization as a 
protective factor. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 17(4), 669–682. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2007.00540.x 

Hayden, A., Bhatt, R. S., Zieber, N., & Kangas, A. (2009). Race-based perceptual asymmetries 
underlying face processing in infancy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(2), 270–275. 
https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.2.270 

Hayden, A. N. (2012). The role of racial information in infant face processing (1266165583; 

2012-99200-012; Issue AAI3491662).  

Heron-Delaney, M., Damon, F., Quinn, P. C., Meary, D., Xiao, N. G., Lee, K., & Pascalis, O. 

(2017). An adult face bias in infants that is modulated by face race. International Journal 
of Behavioral Development, 41(5), 581–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025416651735 

Holmgren, M. (2017). About collective impact: Types of problems, degrees of change, learning 
loops, and methods of thinking. https://www.tamarackcommunity.ca/latest/about-
collective-impact-types-of-problems-degrees-of-change-learning-loops-and-methods-of-
thinking 

Hughes, D., & Chen, L. (1997). When and what parents tell children about race: An examination 

of race-related socialization among African American families. Applied Developmental 
Science, 1(4), 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0104_4 

Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006). 

Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for 
future study. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
1649.42.5.747 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Iruka, I., Curenton, S., Durden, T., & Escayg, K.A. (2020). Don’t look away: Embracing anti-

bias classrooms. https://www.kaplanco.com/product/33461/dont-look-away-embracing-
anti-bias-classrooms?c=16%7CTR1026 

Jemal, A., & Bussey, S.R., (2022). Liberatory education: We are the ones we’ve been waiting 

for. In M. Sykes, & K. Ostendorf. Child care justice: Transforming the system of care for 
young children. (pp. 20-47) Teachers College Press. 

Katz, P. A. (2003). Racists or tolerant multiculturalists? How do they begin? 

https://doi=10.1037%2F0003-066X.58.11.897b 

Katz, P. A., & Barrett, M. (1997). Early Predictors of Children’s Intergroup Attitudes. 

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED415452 

Kelly, D. J., Liu, S., Lee, K., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, A. M., & Ge, L. (2009). 

Development of the other-race effect during infancy: Evidence toward universality? 
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104(1), 105–114. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.01.006 

Kelly, D., Quinn, P., Slater, A., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, M., Ge, L., & Pascalis, O. (2005). 

Three-month-olds, but not newborns, prefer own-race faces. Developmental Science, 
8(6), F31–F36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.0434a.x 

Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to be an antiracist (First Edition). One World. 

Kinzler, K. D. (2013). The development of language as a social category. In Navigating the 

social world: What infants, children, and other species can teach us (1534280943; 2013-
12218-057; pp. 314–317, Chapter xxiii, 424 Pages). Oxford University Press, New York, 
NY. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199890712.003.0057 

Kinzler, K. D., & Spelke, E. S. (2011). Do infants show social preferences for people differing in 

race? Cognition, 119(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.019 

Krasotkina, A., Goetz, A., Hoehle, B., & Schwarzer, G. (2018). Perceptual narrowing in speech 
and face recognition: Evidence for intra-individual cross-domain relations. Frontiers In 
Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01711 

Lesane-Brown, C. L., Brown, T. N., Caldwell, C. H., & Sellers, R. M. (2005). The 

comprehensive race socialization inventory. Journal of Black Studies, 36(2), 163–190. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934704273457 

Liu, S., Xiao, W. S., Xiao, N. G., Quinn, P. C., Zhang, Y., Chen, H., Ge, L., Pascalis, O., & Lee, 
K. (2015). Development of visual preference for own- versus other-race faces in infancy. 
Developmental Psychology, 51(4), 500–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038835 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Loyd, A. B., & Gaither, S. E. (2018). Racial/ethnic socialization for White youth: What we know 
and future directions. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 59, 54–64. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.05.004 

Markus, H. R. (2008). Pride, prejudice, and ambivalence: Toward a unified theory of race and 
ethnicity. American Psychologist, 63(8), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.63.8.651 

Meltzoff, A., Gilliam, W.S. (2024). Young children & implicit racial biases. Daedalus 153 (1): 

65–83. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_02049 

Miller, P. H. (2016). Theories of developmental psychology (6th edition). Worth Publishers. 

Murray, C. B., & Mandara, J. (2002). Racial identity development in African American children: 
Cognitive and experiential antecedents. In Black children: Social, educational, and 
parental environments, 2nd ed (pp. 73–96). Sage Publications, Inc. 

Neblett Jr., E. W., Rivas-Drake, D., & Umaña-Taylor, A. J. (2012). The promise of racial and 
ethnic protective factors in promoting ethnic minority youth development. Child 
Development Perspectives, 6(3), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-
8606.2012.00239.x 

Nesdale, D. (1999). Social identity and ethnic prejudice in children. Psychology and Society. 

Nesdale, D., Durkin, K., Maass, A., & Griffiths, J. (2004). Group status, outgroup ethnicity and 

children’s ethnic attitudes. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 25(2), 237–
251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2004.02.005 

Nesdale, D., & Flesser, D. (2001). Social identity and the development of children’s group 

attitudes. Child Development, 72(2), 506–517. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00293 

Njoroge, W., Benton, T., Lewis, M. L., & Njoroge, N. M. (2009). What are infants learning 
about race? A look at a sample of infants from multiple racial groups. Infant Mental 
Health Journal, 30(5), 549–567. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20228 

Perszyk, D. R., Lei, R. F., Bodenhausen, G. V., Richeson, J. A., & Waxman, S. R. (2019). Bias 
at the intersection of race and gender: Evidence from preschool-aged children. 
Developmental Science, 22(3), e12788. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12788 

Phinney, J. S. (1989). Stages of ethnic identity development in minority group adolescents. The 

Journal of Early Adolescence, 9(1–2), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431689091004 

Piaget, J. (1971). The theory of stages in cognitive development. In D. R. Green, M. P. Ford, & 

G. B. Flamer, Measurement and Piaget. McGraw-Hill. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pickron, C. B., Fava, E., & Scott, L. S. (2017). Follow my gaze: Face race and sex influence 

gaze-cued attention in infancy. Infancy, 22(5), 626–644. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/infa.12180 

Quintana, S. M. (1998). Children’s developmental understanding of ethnicity and race. Applied 

& Preventive Psychology, 7(1), 27–45. 
http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/S0962-1849(98)80020-6 

Raabe, T., & Beelmann, A. (2011). Development of ethnic, racial, and national prejudice in 

childhood and adolescence: A multinational meta-analysis of age differences: Age 
differences in prejudice. Child Development, 82(6), 1715–1737. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01668.x 

Rivas-Drake, D., Seaton, E. K., Markstrom, C., Quintana, S., Syed, M., Lee, R. M., Schwartz, S. 

J., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., French, S., Yip, T., & Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st 
Century Study Group. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity in adolescence: Implications for 
psychosocial, academic, and health outcomes. Child Development, 85(1), 40–57. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12200 

Rochat, P. (2003). Five levels of self-awareness as they unfold early in life. Consciousness and 

Cognition, 12(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8100(03)00081-3 

Rogers, L. O., Kiang, L., White, L., Calzada, E. J., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Byrd, C., Williams, C. 

D., Marks, A., & Whitesell, N. (2020). Persistent concerns: Questions for research on 
ethnic-racial identity development. Research in Human Development, 17(2–3), 130–153. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2020.1831881 

Rogers, O., Mastro, D., Robb, M. B., & Peebles, A. (2021). The inclusion imperative: Why 
media representation matters for kids’ ethnic-racial development. Common Sense. 

Shabani, K., Khatib, M., & Ebadi, S. (2010). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development: 

Instructional implications and teachers’ professional development. English Language 
Teaching, 3(4), p237. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n4p237 

Spencer, M. B. (1983). Children’s cultural values and parental child rearing strategies. 

Developmental Review, 3(4), 351–370. 
http://dx.doi.org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/0273-2297(83)90020-5 

Spencer, M. B., 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. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579497001454 

Stevenson, H. C. (1995). Relationship of adolescent perceptions of racial socialization to racial 

identity. Journal of Black Psychology, 21(1), 49–70. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/00957984950211005 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Thomas, R. M. (2005). Comparing theories of child development (6th ed.). Wadsworth/Thomson 

Learning. 

Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., Cross Jr., W. E., Rivas-Drake, D., Schwartz, 

S. J., Syed, M., Yip, T., Seaton, E., & Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st Century 
Study Group. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity during adolescence and into young 
adulthood: An integrated conceptualization. Child Development, 85(1), 21–39. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12196 

Vélez-Agosto, N. M., Soto-Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, M., Vega-Molina, S., & 

García Coll, C. (2017). Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture 
from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), 900–910. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617704397 

Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological 

processes. Harvard University Press. 

Waxman, S. R. (2021). Racial awareness and bias begin early: Developmental entry points, 

challenges, and a call to action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(5), 893–902. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211026968 

White-Johnson, R. L., Ford, K. R., & Sellers, R. M. (2010). Parental racial socialization profiles: 
Association with demographic factors, racial discrimination, childhood socialization, and 
racial identity. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(2), 237–247. 
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016111 

Williams, C. D., Byrd, C. M., Quintana, S. M., Anicama, C., Kiang, L., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., 

Calzada, E. J., Pabón Gautier, M., Ejesi, K., Tuitt, N. R., Martinez-Fuentes, S., White, L., 
Marks, A., Rogers, L. O., & Whitesell, N. (2020). A lifespan model of ethnic-racial 
identity. Research in Human Development, 17(2–3), 99–129. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2020.1831882 

Xiao, N. G., Wu, R., Quinn, P. C., Liu, S., Tummeltshammer, K. S., Kirkham, N. Z., Ge, L., 

Pascalis, O., & Lee, K. (2018). Infants rely more on gaze cues from own-race than other-
race adults for learning under uncertainty. Child Development, 89(3), e229–e244. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12798 

Yip, T. (2018). Ethnic/racial identity—A double-edged sword? Associations with discrimination 

and psychological outcomes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(3), 170–
175. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417739348 

Zubler, J. M., Wiggins, L. D., Macias, M. M., Whitaker, T. M., Shaw, J. S., Squires, J. K., Pajek, 

J. A., Wolf, R. B., Slaughter, K. S., Broughton, A. S., Gerndt, K. L., Mlodoch, B. J., & 
Lipkin, P. H. (2022). Evidence-informed milestones for developmental surveillance tools. 
Pediatrics, 149(3), e2021052138. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-052138 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CHAPTER 2: STUDY 1 – MAPPING RESEARCH ON EARLY ETHNIC-RACIAL 

AWARENESS DEVELOPMENT AMONG INFANTS AND TODDLERS: A SCOPING 

REVIEW 

Introduction 

The lifespan model of ethnic-racial identity (the lifespan model) offers a way to 

understand the evolution of ethnic-racial identity (ERI) starting with its origin and extending 

across all developmental periods of the human lifespan (Williams et al. 2020). The impetus for 

this work was to connect the “...relatively piecemeal approach [that] makes it difficult to chart 

continuity across developmental periods...” (Williams et al., 2020, p. 100). The resulting 

integrated model provides a helpful overarching framing for the construct of ERI. However, the 

lifespan model is also strengthened by in depth research on ERI that is focused within specific 

developmental periods. There is a need for both detailed ERI research within precise 

developmental periods, and a cohesive model that connects all developmental periods together. 

The lifespan model asserts that ERI is “...a process that begins in early infancy and progresses 

throughout late adulthood” (Williams et al., 2020, p. 101). When considering the initial phase of 

this development starting in early infancy and extending to age 3, it is important to situate the 

research within the connection between ERI and ethnic-racial socialization (ERS). The use of the 

term ethnic-racial is reflective of expansion in the field (Hughes et al., 2006; Markus, 2008). 

Many current scholars have shifted to use of the combined term, instead of racial and ethnic 

separately, to encapsulate the entirety of the construct (Doucet et al., 2018; Umaña-Taylor et al., 

2014). This combined usage is seen in both ERI and ERS language. While closely connected 

ERI and ERS are unique constructs. ERI comprises the ways in which one perceives, describes, 

and values their personal ethnic-racial group membership (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014), and how 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
individuals define their sense of self based on the ethnic and racial backgrounds with which they 

feel affiliated. Ethnic-Racial Socialization (ERS) refers to the messages that children receive 

regarding ethnicity and race” (Hughes et al., 2006; Quintana, 1998). These messages come from 

caregivers (e.g., parents, families, and educators), environments (e.g., home, neighborhood, 

school, geographic region), and media (e.g., books, toys, television, and technology tools; 

Williams et al. 2020). Through these socializing agents, children learn about common norms, 

values, and customs that may be related to both their own ERI and that of others (Hughes et al., 

2006). ERI and ERS are connected in that the quality, frequency, and content of the ERS 

messages children receive directly impacts the way in which their ERI takes shape (e.g., Hughes 

et al., 2023). 

The Lifespan ERI study group that developed the lifespan model also published a 

complimentary paper entitled, Persistent concerns: questions for research on ethnic-racial 

identity development (Rogers et al., 2020). In this paper, the authors addressed five persistent 

questions that emerged during the development of the lifespan model (Rogers et al., 2020). The 

first question was, “When does ERI development begin and end?” (Rogers et al., 2020, p. 131). 

The lifespan model defines the earliest stage of ERI development as “ethnic-racial priming” 

(Rogers et al., 2020, p. 105). While some exemplar studies are cited (e.g., Timeo et al., 2017), 

the extent to which ERI development has been studied in relation the ethnic-racial priming 

period is unclear. The first dimension of ERI development as “ethic-racial awareness [which] 

captures individuals’ perceptions that ethnic-racial groups are categories with social 

meaningfulness, as well as individuals’ perceptions about how ethnic-racial groups are viewed in 

society” (Rogers et al., 2020, p. 103). The dimension of ethnic-racial awareness presents 

differently across the lifespan with increased sophistication over time. Again, the extent to which 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
the initial emergence of ethnic-racial awareness has been studied among infants and toddlers is 

opaque. Given the relative ambiguity of ERI development research in the earliest developmental 

periods, there have been calls for additional research on ERI specifically within infancy and 

toddlerhood (e.g., Rogers et al., 2020; Ruck et al., 2021; Waxman, 2021). 

The purpose of this study is to summarize and map what is known about the development 

of ethnic-racial awareness among children birth to 3 years of age and identify potential gaps in 

the present literature. Specifically, this study examines (1) how ethnic-racial awareness among 

infants and toddlers has been studied and (2) how caregivers' ethnic-racial socialization practices 

with infants and toddlers have been studied. 

Method 

The current study utilized a scoping review to systematically identify and analyze the 

existing literature on ethnic-racial awareness, and influences on this awareness among infants 

and toddlers. Scoping reviews are a method to examine the state of a topical research area that is 

new or emerging (Mays et al., 2001). Unlike other advanced evidence syntheses such as 

systematic reviews and meta-analyses, scoping reviews do not include in-depth evaluation of 

research quality, quantitative analyses of study results, or extensive analysis of implications for 

policy or practice (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). Rather, they illuminate the breadth and depth of 

research in an area and identify existing gaps which may justify and guide more detailed 

systematic reviews or identify directions for further original research (Arksey & O’Malley, 

2005). Further, scoping reviews offer a systematic way to demarcate and map a body of 

knowledge in order to identify key concepts and determine appropriate next steps in moving a 

body of research forward (Mays et al., 2001; Tricco et al., 2018).  

28 

 
 
 
 
 
While previous reviews have included literature on ethnic-racial awareness and potential 

influences, there is limited focus on children under the age of 3 years (e.g., Hughs et al., 2006; 

Priest et al., 2014; Raabe & Beelmann, 2011; Skinner & Meltzoff, 2018). Studies that do include 

infants and toddlers tend to emphasize child behavior that demonstrates the salience of ethnicity 

(e.g., looking time studies), yet the size and range of the research literature on the topic of ethnic-

racial awareness and the factors that might influence variation of behavior among infants and 

toddlers specifically is unclear. Thus, a scoping review was selected as the methodology for this 

study. In addition to examining the literature to determine the current scope of research on the 

development of ethnic-racial awareness among infants and toddlers, this study also aimed to 

detect knowledge gaps in order to provide direction for future research on this topic.  

The research team was comprised of five individuals, all of whom are co-authors of this 

study. At the time the study was conducted, two of the team members (including the first author) 

were doctoral students, two were faculty members, one was a post doc researcher, and the final 

team member was a research librarian. The personal ERI's of each team member are documented 

in Table 1. 

Table 1 

Ethnic-Racial Identities of Research Team Members   

Research Team Member  

Personal Ethnic-Racial Identity 

Doctoral Student 

Black-Biracial with West African and Northwestern European Ancestry 

Doctoral Student 
Post Doctoral Researcher 

Korean 
white Southern European 

Associate Professor 
Professor 

Research Librarian  

white European American 
white with Northwestern and Northcentral European Ancestry 

white European American 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The development of the research approach was guided by the PRISMA extension for scoping 

reviews (Tricco et al., 2018) and the framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005). Our 

review process followed the stages recommended by Arksey and O’Malley: 

Stage 1. Identifying the research question 

Stage 2. Identifying relevant studies 

Stage 3. Study selection 

Stage 4. Charting the data 

Stage 5. Collating, summarizing, and reporting the results 

This scoping review is reported using the PRISMA-ScR and PRISMA-Searching guidance. An 

internal protocol was created but not registered.  

Eligibility Criteria 

The inclusion criteria used to determine which studies were included in this scoping 

review can be seen in Table 2.  

Table 2 

Inclusion Criteria and Descriptions 

Inclusion Criteria 

Published from January 1, 1990, 
through Present.  
Published in the English language. 

Focus on the development of ethnic-
racial awareness among infants and 
toddlers. 

Focused on understanding race and 
ethnicity in relation to infants and 
toddlers 0 to 3 years (36 mo. but not 
beyond). 
Published and unpublished empirical 
studies and review articles such as 
meta-analysis, and systematic 
reviews. 

Descriptions 

The last database search for this study was completed on March 6, 2023.  

Included studies had to be available in the English language due to English 
being the primary language used by all research team members. 
Studies had to explicitly address how infants and toddlers develop 
conceptualizations of race and ethnicity, personal identity, visual 
categorization of people, in-group and out-group distinctions and 
preferences, and ethnic-racial familiarity. 
When studies include children within this age range and older children, 
they were only included when age could be explicitly disaggregated in the 
results.   

Studies in journal articles, books, and dissertations were included. 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 2 (cont’d) 

Descriptive and intervention studies 
using qualitative, quantitative, or 
mixed methods and had to include a 
direct measure of child behavior. 

The research team was interested in including studies that provided parent-
report data and included the results of direct child observations. The reason 
was to specifically look at variation in child outcomes in combination with 
parent report data. The research team was interested in accounting for 
observable differences that could be seen in child behavior compared to 
potential influences on variation within child behavior. Parent report 
measures were only acceptable when parents were trained as observers of 
child behavior. 

Information Sources 

An initial search was run June 10th and 11th 2021 in seven databases: PsycInfo 

(ProQuest), PsycArticles (ProQuest, bundled with PsycInfo), Web of Science Core Collection, 

ERIC (ProQuest), Education Source (EBSCO), Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), Family and 

Society Studies (EBSCO). An updated search was run March 6th, 2023, in the same seven 

databases. The search strategies were designed, in consultation with the research team, by a 

research librarian who is a co-author of this study. Keywords selected captured the concepts of 

infants and toddlers, socialization, and race or ethnicity. The search string was as follows:  

(Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies) AND (Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR 

preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR perception OR attitude OR categor*) AND (race OR 

ethni* OR racial). This search string was intended to capture any study that explicitly addressed 

how infants and toddlers develop conceptualizations of race, ethnicity, personal identity, visual 

categorization of people, in-group/out-group distinctions or preferences, and ethnic-racial bias. 

Search Strategy 

Keywords were searched for in the titles and abstracts. Depending on the database, 

appropriate controlled vocabulary terms were selected from each database’s thesaurus. Results 

were limited to articles from January 1, 1990, through March 6, 2023. No other limits were 

applied. Individual search strategies for each database can be found in Appendix A. This search 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
yielded 7,059 citations. 1,613 duplicates were removed using the web-based research platforms 

Covidence and Zotero. 

Citation chaining was performed on 8 seminal papers using the reference lists and Scopus 

or Google Scholar, which resulted in 2,049 citations. 190 duplicates were removed. The manual 

process of looking through relevant journals to identify papers that met inclusion criteria known 

as hand searching (Richards, 2008) added an additional 9 papers. After the removal of one 

duplicate, 1,868 papers were added for the screening of citations via other methods. Two 

additional organizations, the National Black Child Development Institute, and the Abolitionist 

Teaching Network, were included in the pilot search, but were not found to have enough 

applicable information to be included in the final search. The complete PRISMA 2020 Flow 

Diagram is shown in Figure 2. 

Selection of Evidence 

A minimum of two research team members independently reviewed all titles and 

abstracts that were identified through the formal search process. Inclusion and exclusion criteria 

were used to select studies for full review. Any discrepancies in inclusion and exclusion criteria 

application were resolved by team discussion and consensus. Next, a minimum of two research 

team members independently reviewed the full text for all studies that were included after the 

title and abstract review. The same processes for applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and 

resolving discrepancies were utilized at this stage. After this screening process and the removal 

of duplicates between the search methods, 105 papers were included in the final analysis (see 

Appendix B). 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Data Charting Process 

The Covidence platform was utilized for screening and coding research studies published 

between January 1, 1990, and March 6, 2023. Covidence is designed to streamline the process of 

systematic reviews. This platform allows for independent coding by multiple reviewers, 

resolving coding conflicts by consensus, and populating coding results into a spreadsheet format. 

For the current study, Covidence was utilized in three phases. First, all reviewers independently 

screened the titles and abstracts that were identified through keyword database searchers and 

hand searching. 

Figure 2 

PRISMA 2020 Flow Diagram  

Second, reviewers independently applied inclusion and exclusion criteria to full articles 

identified after the initial screening phase. Lastly, full articles that met all inclusion criteria were 

coded independently by reviewers. An internally developed coding form was utilized to code all 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
included studies. During the coding process, the research team identified papers that presented 

more than one individual study, i.e., those that reported multiple experiments with different 

samples within a single paper. When multiple studies were identified within a single paper, each 

study was coded separately. 168 unique studies were coded from within the 105 papers included 

in the sample.  

Data Items 

Variables were coded at either the paper or the study level using a “check all that apply” 

coding approach. (see Table 3). Coding completed at the paper level included the entire journal 

article, book chapter, or dissertation, while coding at the unique study level included each 

separate experiment within an included journal article, book chapter, or dissertation. Type of 

publication, publication year, and discussion of potential influences on variation in the 

development of ethnic-racial awareness among infants and toddlers were all variables coded at 

the paper level. The following variables were coded at the unique study level: study design, 

study setting, geographic location, sample demographics, study method, stimuli, outcome 

measures, and results. Additionally, the usage of any tools to measure influences on the 

development of ethnic-racial awareness among infants and toddlers or ethnic-racial socialization 

practices among their caregivers was also coded at the study level. Conflicts between 

independent coders were resolved by consensus during each phase. 

Table 3 

Coded Categorical Variables 

Variables coded at the paper level (n = 105) to answer RQ1 

Variable 

Type of publication 

Categories Coded 

Number of Studies 

Peer Reviewed Journal article 
Dissertation 

Open Access Journal article 

97 
5 

2 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3 (cont’d) 

Year of publication 

Book chapter 
1990 –2023 

1 
see Figure 3 

Variables coded at the study level (n = 168) to answer RQ1 

Variable 

Geographic location 

Study design 

Variable 

Study method 

Study setting 

Number of participants 
Race and Ethnicity of participants 

Categories Coded 

Number of Studies 

Region of country or name of state or 
province if available 

Randomized experimental study 
Quasi-experimental study 

see Figure 3 

129 

30 

Categories Coded 

Number of Studies 

Intervention study 
Naturalistic observational study 
Qualitative study 
Single Age or short age range study  

Cross sectional study 
Longitudinal study 

Lab 
Home  

Other 
16–213 

Black 
Asian 

Native 
Latiné or Latinx 

white 
Multiracial 

4 
4 
1 
105 

50 
13 

158 
8 

2 
M = 53 (SD = 38) 

see Figure 4 

see Figure 5 
96 

Age of participants (in months) 

Stimuli 

Newborn to 36-months 
Still face images 

Outcome measures 

Language 
Videos 

Actors 
Dynamic Images 

Toys, Objects, or Food 
Food  
Looking Time: length of time spent 
looking at stimuli 
or Eye Gaze: specific area where gaze is 
focused 
Object Choice: child choosing a toy or 
object 
Food Choice: child choosing a food 
Brain Activity: any measurement of brain 
activity 

51 
32 

14 
19 

5 
5 

134 

14 

8 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3 (cont’d) 

Results 

Results 

Imitation: child consciously imitating 
another (e.g., lifting arms up) 
Mimicry: child subconsciously mimicking 
another (e.g., pupil size changing) 
Both Looking Time and Brain Activity 

Demonstrated capacity to distinguish 
others based on phenotypic features or 
language 
Demonstrate in-group familiarity when 
distinguishing others 
Demonstrate out-group interest 

Distinguish differences without 
demonstrating familiarity or preference 
for either an out-group or an in-group 

4 

3 

5 

133 

100 

17 

18 

Variables coded at the study level for studies that did not include in-group stimuli (n = 24) to answer RQ1 

Variable 

Results 

Categories Coded 

Distinguish between groups using other 
characteristics such as facial 
attractiveness, language, and shared 
features (i.e., clothing color) 
Did not distinguish between groups using 
other characteristics 

Number of Studies 
20 

2 

Variables coded at the paper level (n = 105) to answer RQ3 

Variable 

Categories Coded 

Number of Studies  

Discussion of Ethnic-Racial Socialization 
Influences 

Ethnic-Racial Socialization Measures 
(Name and description of measurement 
tool used) 

Not Applicable because Ethnic-Racial 
Socialization Factors were not Discussed  
Exposure to Other-Race Individuals 

Exposure to Other Languages 
Exposure to Diverse Materials (e.g., 
books, toys) 
Exposure to Diverse Media (e.g., 
television shows, apps) 
Exposure to Diverse Cultural Experiences 
(e.g., food, music, celebrations) 
Other (living in neighborhoods that are 
ethnically and racially diverse or 
linguistically diverse based on census 
data) 
Non-validated, parent questionaries 

Census data 
Language Exposure Questionnaire Bosch 
& Sebastian-Galles, 1997 

52 

39 

9 
1 

0 

0 

4 

14  

4 
5 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3 (cont’d) 

Scale adapted from Brown et al. (1999) 
assessing participants familiarity with 
African people  

Infant-Individual Interaction Scale  

Infant-Caregiver and Family Member 
Interaction Scale 

1 

1 

1 

Findings 

The final analysis included 105 papers published between January 1990 and March 2023. 

Included papers reported on a total of 168 unique studies. Included studies explicitly address 

how infants and toddlers (birth to age 3) use visual and auditory stimuli to categorize others, 

develop conceptualizations of in-group and out-group distinctions, and establish ethnic-racial 

familiarity. 

How has ethnic-racial awareness among infants and toddlers been studied? 

Publication Type, Publication Year, and Study Location  

Out of the 105 included papers, 93% (n = 97) were articles published in peer reviewed 

journals. Five dissertations, 2 open access journal articles, and 1 book chapter were also 

included. Findings for the paper publication year demonstrate how interest in this research topic 

has grown in recent years. Only 11 papers meeting the inclusion criteria for this scoping review 

were published during the first 19 years (between January 1990 and December 2008) of this 

scoping review’s 34-year range. The number of relevant studies began to increase in 2009 with 

94 papers meeting the inclusion criteria published between January 2009 and March 2023. 

The vast majority of studies were conducted in the U.S. (n = 76) followed by Canada (n = 

21), Germany (n = 14), the UK (n =13), China (n = 10), France (n = 8), Japan (n = 6), Singapore 

(n = 5), and Israel (n = 5). A smaller number of studies were conducted in the following 

countries: Australia (n = 3), Spain (n = 2), Netherlands (n = 2), Ethiopia (n = 1), Cameroon (n = 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1), and Taiwan (n = 1). Two studies included participants from more than one country within 

their sample populations; one study was conducted in both Germany and Cameroon, and another 

study was conducted in both Israel and Ethiopia. As seen in Figure 3, these findings reveal the 

disproportionate focus of this research in Western countries.   

Figure 3 

Publication of Included Studies by Year and Geography 

Study Design and Research Method 

The majority of the 168 included studies utilized randomized experimental designs (n = 

129). Fewer studies used quasi-experimental designs (n = 30), interventions (n = 4), naturalistic 

observation (n = 4), and qualitative designs (n = 1). Nearly all studies were conducted in lab 

settings (n = 158), with 8 additional studies taking place in the home setting and 2 studies being 

conducted in a school setting. 

While 50 studies used a cross-sectional approach, most studies included a single age or a 

single short age range for their sample (n = 105), and only 8% of studies utilized a longitudinal 

design (n = 13). Among the few longitudinal studies, 62% had samples that included only white 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
participants, and only 3 studies included toddlers. All three of these studies were published by 

Katz and colleagues in the 1997 book: Race, gender and young children. 

Sample Demographics 

The average sample size among included studies was 53 (SD = 38) participants with the 

smallest sample size being 16 participants and the largest sample size being 213 participants.  

Most studies included sample populations from single ethnic-racial groups (n = 117), and the 

majority involved white participants exclusively (n = 94), followed by Asian participants 

exclusively (n = 23). A smaller number of studies included multiple ethnic-racial groups (n = 

27), and only 10 studies included biracial or Multiracial participants in their samples. Of the 

studies that did not report the ethnic-racial demographics of their sample populations (n = 24), all 

were conducted in countries with majority white populations: the USA (n = 18), the UK (n = 3), 

Spain (n = 2), and Germany (n = 1). These study locations suggest that the sample populations 

were likely all or majority white (Figure 4). 

Figure 4 

Ethnic-Racial Diversity Among Study Samples 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Further, infants were more likely to be included in the study samples compared to 

toddlers. Children 12 months of age and younger were included in the majority of the studies (n 

= 134) compared to the number of studies that included toddlers ages 13 months to 36 months (n 

= 30). Only four studies included both children 12 months or younger and children 13 months to 

36 months of age. The most common age of study participants was 9 months (n = 59) followed 

by 6 months (n = 53), and 3 months (n = 35). A full summary of the ages included in the sample 

populations can be seen in Figure 5. 

Figure 5 

Number of Studies Including Each Age Group 

Stimuli and Outcome Measures 

The majority (n = 124) of the 168 individual studies examined how infants distinguish 

others based on observable, phenotypic differences such as skin tone, facial features, and 

emotional expressions. An additional 27 studies examined how infants and toddlers distinguish 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
others based on language and accent, and 17 studies included both observable, phenotypic 

differences and language or accent differences as examined variables. While some may think of 

language as separate from the constructs of ethnic-racial awareness and ethnic-racial identity, it 

is widely considered to be a significant element of ethnic-identity among many ethnic-racial 

groups (e.g., DeJesus et al., 2019). 

Still face images were used as stimuli in most of the studies (n = 96) followed by vocal or 

sound stimuli (n = 51). Other stimuli included videos (n = 32), dynamic facial images (n = 19), 

live actors (n = 14), and objects such as toys or food (n = 5). The vast majority of studies utilized 

looking time as an outcome measure (n = 134). Some studies measured brain activity (n = 8), and 

5 studies used both looking time and brain activity as the outcome measures. Other studies used 

object choice (n = 14), and fewer studies used behavior imitation (n = 4) or pupil dilation 

mimicry (n = 3) as outcome measures. Less frequently, studies have examined children’s object 

choices and behavior (10%), brain activity (4%), behavior imitation (2%), and pupil dilation 

mimicry (2%) as responses indicating development of ethnic-racial awareness. 

Study Results  

The variable categories for results included ability to distinguish faces based on distinct 

features, same-race familiarity or preference, other-race familiarity or preference, ability to 

distinguish between own-language and other-language, same-language familiarity or preference, 

or anticipation of behavior based on in-group or out-group membership. Most included studies 

reported average findings for the whole sample with little attention paid to individual differences 

or potential influences on or predictors of variation in the development of early ethnic-racial 

awareness. However, potential predictors of variation can be detected when looking across the 

sample characteristics of included studies, most predominantly, age.  

41 

 
 
 
 
 
Of the 168 included studies, only 9 studies did not demonstrate infant and toddler 

capacity to distinguish others based on phenotypic features or language. Two of these studies 

were conducted with newborns suggesting that the capacity to distinguish people based on 

different facial features is not present at birth (Kelly et al., 2005; Quinn et al., 2008). Two 

additional studies from Kinzler and colleagues (Kinzler & Spelke, 2011) showed that white 10-

month-olds equally gave a toy to a Black or a white actor, and white 2.5–3-year-olds equally 

gave a gift to a Black or a white actor. Similarly, Castelli and colleagues found that white 1-to-2-

year-olds took food equally from a Black or white person, but white 3–4-year-olds were more 

likely to take food from a white person (Castelli & Carraro, 2020). Taken together, these findings 

suggest that age is one influence on variation in the development of ERI awareness.  

A study by Hayden and colleagues (2012) showed that white 3.5-month-olds were not 

able to discriminate between own-race and other-race faces when the facial images were 

inverted. This result seemed to be related to the way the faces were displayed as participants 

were able to discriminate between the same own-race and other-race facial images when they 

were not inverted. (Hayden et al., 2012). Thus, the quality and context of exposure may be 

another influence on variation in the development of ERI awareness. 

 The final three studies in this category demonstrated conflicting findings compared to 

other studies with similar samples and designs. In a 2014 study by Howard and colleagues, 19-

month-old native English speakers did not show imitation preferences between English or 

Spanish speaking actors (Howard et al., 2014). A 2017 study found that 4–12-month-old infants 

did not show preferential looking time toward images of same and other race faces (Montoya et 

al., 2017). Finally, a study by Xiao and colleagues showed that 7-month-olds followed the gaze 

of same and other-race adults equally when they were 100% reliable (Xiao et al., 2018). The 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
results of these three studies demonstrate the need to continue exploring the differences in 

context and variables that impact the development of ethnic-racial awareness among infants and 

toddlers.  

Results for Studies that Included In-Group Stimuli 

Of the 144 studies that included in-group stimuli (stimuli with features such as skin color 

or language that are the same as participants), most (n = 133) demonstrated that infants and 

toddlers are able to distinguish others based on differences they observe (i.e., phenotypic 

features) or hear (i.e., language or accent). Further, the majority of studies that included in-group 

stimuli demonstrated that infants and toddlers display in-group familiarity (e.g., higher 

proportion of looking time when encountering in-group stimuli) when distinguishing others (n = 

100).  

While most studies demonstrated that infants and toddlers are more drawn to faces and 

languages that are most familiar to them, fewer studies demonstrated that infants and toddlers 

display out-group interest (e.g., higher proportion of looking time when encountering out-group 

stimuli) when presented with both in-group and out-group stimuli (n = 17). Additionally, 18 

studies showed that infants and toddlers can distinguish differences even though they do not 

demonstrate familiarity or preference for either an out-group or an in-group (e.g., looking time 

indicates ability to distinguish difference, but proportion of looking time is relatively equal 

toward both in-group and out-group stimuli). This group of studies highlights the need for 

additional research that explores influences that may be associated with variation in how young 

children respond to people who represent out-groups. 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Results for Studies that Did Not Included In-Group Stimuli 

Some studies did not include in-group stimuli (n = 24). Among these studies, most (n = 

22) had results that demonstrated infants and toddlers’ ability to distinguish between groups 

using other characteristics such as facial attractiveness, language, and shared features (i.e., 

clothing color). Two of the studies that did not include in-group stimuli reported that participants 

were not able to distinguish between groups using other characteristics. One of these studies used 

facial images of two other-race groups (Black and Asian) as stimuli. After being habituated to 

select Black and Asian faces, white 9-month-olds who were habituated to select Black faces 

were not able to distinguish a novel Asian face (Quinn et al., 2015). Likewise, the infants did not 

demonstrate the ability to distinguish a novel Black face if they were habituated to Asian faces 

(Quinn et al., 2015). These findings suggest that the participating infants may have perceived 

both Black and Asian faces as a single other-race group (Quinn et al., 2015). However, the 

results of this particular experiment were null, which makes interpretation unclear (Quinn et al., 

2015). 

Another study that demonstrated an inability of participants to distinguish between 

groups used animated geometric objects as the stimuli (Powell & Spelke, 2013). The objects 

represented belonging to distinct groups based on having similar features. The objects were also 

presented with different features, colors and shapes (Powell & Spelke, 2013). While an outlier 

since the study did not use human faces as the stimuli, this study met inclusion criteria as it 

involved direct measures of infant categorizing behavior based on visual perception and 

measured by looking time (Powell & Spelke, 2013). Other studies within the same paper, found 

that when identical objects (e.g., same color and shape) were paired with other social cues such 

as proximity on the screen and synchronous movement, 8-month-olds could distinguish the 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
groups, and they demonstrated anticipation of similar behavior based on group membership. 

However, the infants did not demonstrate this ability to distinguish groups in one study where the 

social cues such as proximity and synchronous movement were absent. (Powell & Spelke, 2013). 

While providing interesting information related to how infants determine group membership and 

predict group behavior, this particular set of studies is inconsistent with the others in its use of 

animated geometric objects as stimuli.  

Ethnic-Racial Socialization Measures 

 Influences on the development of ethnic-racial awareness among infants and toddlers 

have primarily been studied using non-validated questionnaires that ask caregivers to indicate 

infant and toddler exposure to other ethnic-racial groups (n = 39) and other languages (n = 9). 

Ethnic-racial diversity (n = 3) and linguistic diversity (n = 1) of geographic locations based on 

census data have also been used to measure possible influences.  

How have caregivers' ethnic-racial socialization practices with infants and toddlers been 

studied? 

 In this scoping review, ERS messages were considered a potential influence of variation 

in ERI awareness development among infants and toddlers. We specifically coded for whether or 

not ERS influences were mentioned in the discussion, implications, or conclusion sections of 

included papers. The search string used for this scoping review included: (Infan* OR toddler* 

OR baby OR babies) AND (Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation 

OR bias OR perception OR attitude OR categor*) AND (race OR ethni* OR racial). The breadth 

of this search string ensured that all papers addressing ERS of infants and toddlers were 

identified. ERS influences mentioned were only coded if they were presented as factors that 

could explain variation in the study outcomes. The coding protocol also included recording any 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
specific methods or assessment tools used to measure ERS socialization or ERS influences. If 

socialization influences were measured, the name or description of the measurement tool(s) was 

documented on the coding protocol.  

Findings from this scoping review demonstrate that engagement in ERS practices among 

caregivers of infants and toddlers has generally not been studied. In fact, no studies in this 

scoping review included organic engagement in ERS practices as a variable of interest, and only 

one study (Heron-Delaney et al., 2011) involved caregiver engagement in intentional exposure to 

other-race images as part of the study design. While no papers in our sample provided direct 

examples of caregiver engagement in ERS, there were two promising findings that could inform 

future intervention work. A longitudinal study conducted by Heron-Delaney and colleagues in 

2011 found that the ability to discriminate between other-race faces was retained among white 

infants after they were regularly exposed to a set of books showing diverse faces between 6-and-

9-months of age (Heron-Delaney et al., 2011). Similarly, Anzures and colleagues found that 8- to 

10-month-old white infants who had daily experience with Asian faces over three weeks were 

less likely to demonstrate perceptual narrowing with respect to Asian faces (Anzures et al., 

2012). Both studies provide possible directions for investigating how the development of ethnic-

racial bias might be disrupted during the infant and toddler years. 

Discussion 

Present State of Research 

Findings from this scoping review demonstrate that ethnic-racial awareness among 

infants and toddlers has been studied with increased frequency in recent years. Research 

conducted to date provides substantial evidence supporting the developmental relevance of 

ethnic-racial awareness among infants and toddlers with 92% of studies demonstrating the ability 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
to differentiate others based on phenotypic differences in visual and auditory features, as well as 

evidence of in-group familiarity. Further, 69% of studies that included in-group stimuli indicated 

that infants and toddlers demonstrate in-group (e.g., ethnicity, race, language, culture) 

familiarity.  

In terms of study design, randomized experimental designs in lab settings with looking 

time as the most dominant behavioral measure have been the most used methodologies. While 

lab-based studies allow for the establishment of a more controlled study environment, the lack of 

studies that take place in more naturalistic settings, and the near complete omission of qualitative 

methods limits our understanding of how ethnic-racial awareness emerges and is expressed 

among young children within the context of daily life. Use of still face images and looking-time 

behavior provides consistent standardization; however, it is important to note that infants and 

toddlers will primarily interact with others in dynamic ways that may not be best reflected by the 

static images of photographs.  

This scoping review also illuminated a remarkable gap in terms of examining ethnic-

racial awareness and developmental influences among infants from minoritized populations and 

among toddlers (13–36 months). The sample populations in the included studies were 

overwhelmingly White children who were 12 months of age or younger. The imbalance of 

ethnic-racial diversity among included study samples and the limited inclusion of toddlers 

demonstrates that the findings within this body of research to date primarily measure outcomes 

for white infants. Further, the majority of studies were conducted in what Henrich and colleagues 

refer to as WEIRD societies – Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (Henrich 

et al., 2010). Thus, there is a gap in what is known about the development of ethnic-racial 

awareness among infants and toddlers in the global south.  

47 

 
 
 
 
 
Findings also demonstrate an absence of studies examining early anti-bias interventions 

and ethnic-racial socialization practices among caregivers of infants and toddlers. While not all 

studies demonstrated infant and toddler capacity to distinguish others based on race, prior 

research does suggest that a bias toward whiteness may not be prominent in infants and toddlers 

but has been observed in the preschool and early elementary years (Castelli & Carraro, 2020; 

Kinzler & Spelke, 2011). This implies that efforts to disrupt the development of harmful bias 

among young children may have a window of opportunity in the infant and toddler years. 

Meaningful evaluation of interventions will require longitudinal study designs; however, few 

studies employed longitudinal designs (n = 13) and less than 2% of the included longitudinal 

studies included toddlers in their sample. 

Implications for Research 

This scoping review confirmed that ethnic-racial awareness emerges in infancy. While 

this was already known, results from this scoping review explicitly demonstrate that this 

knowledge is primarily based on findings from looking time studies done with very young, 

white, infants. Looking time studies do not replicate the dynamic interactions infants have with 

people in their environments. Thus, there is a need for future research to focus on the inclusion 

of observational studies that are conducted in settings that more closely mimic the natural 

environment of infants and mirror the ways in which they engage with individuals in those 

environments. Naturalistic observation methods are vital when studying young children before 

they acquire verbal language and pointing skills (Marcella & Howes, 2015). Additional emphasis 

on research in naturalistic settings could also support more understanding of individual 

differences in ethnic-racial awareness, familiarity, and preferences among children birth to 3 

years old. which might be best explored in naturalistic settings. 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
There is also a need to increase the ethnic-racial diversity of participants when studying 

ethnic-racial awareness and developmental influences among infants and toddlers. The U. S. 

population is simultaneously increasing in ethnic-racial diversity and demonstrating more ethnic-

racial bias. Experts predict that Gen Z will be the last generation that is majority white in the 

United States (Frey, 2023). Further, the Multiracial population is a rapidly expanding 

demographic group (Nishina & Witcow, 2019). This is especially evident among child 

population in the United States (Lopez et al., 2015). Continuing to conduct this research 

primarily with populations that are exclusively white or only including single ethnic-racial 

groups in study samples severely limits the expansion of knowledge in the field. This scoping 

review demonstrated that even when study participants are not from only one ethnic-racial 

demographic group, samples that include two ethnic-racial demographic groups are typically 

comprised of participants who are white and participants who are Black. Given the shifting 

demographics globally and specifically in the U.S. context, this dyadic approach is outdated and 

incomplete. Additional ethnic-racial groups should be included in future research with greater 

frequency. This need is especially notable with Multiracial populations. 

Further, findings illuminated that the toddler age group is under-represented in the ethnic-

racial awareness development literature. The fact that toddlers are not frequently included in 

samples of studies on this topic excludes a key period along the developmental continuum. This 

is especially problematic given that the second year of life is characterized by the emergence of a 

sense of self as distinct from others (Rochat, 2003). Future research would benefit from a more 

purposive inclusion of toddler participants between 12 and 36 months of age.  

Finally, there is a clear need for future research to better measure the ethnic-racial 

socialization practices that caregivers of infants and toddlers engage in and their impact on child 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
development. While data on potential developmental influences on ethnic-racial awareness (such 

as exposure to ethnically and racially diverse individuals) are being collected through parent 

report, there is a lack of valid measures to examine ERS practices and outcomes with the infant 

and toddler age group. Future research should investigate what types of ERS infants and toddlers 

are being exposed to at what levels and how they are responding. Along with the use of validated 

measures, more longitudinal intervention studies will be needed to understand the impact of ERS 

on infants and toddlers and to test the results of interventions designed to promote healthy ethnic 

racial identity and disrupt the development of ethnic-racial bias in the earliest years.  

Limitations 

While providing an important summary of the extant literature on early ethnic-racial 

awareness and developmental influences among infants and toddlers, this scoping review also 

had some limitations. First, the search was done with databases that focused on psychological 

research, and did not include research that may have been done in other social sciences relevant 

to this topic, such as anthropology. The specific time frame is also a limitation. Results from this 

scoping review include papers published from January 1, 1990, through March 6, 2023. Any 

studies examining the developmental relevance of ethnicity and race among infants and toddlers 

that have been published after that point are not included in this scoping review.  

A scoping review is limited by design and does not include statistical analysis. This 

methodology is not intended to synthesize results nor appraise the quality of included evidence 

(Arksey & O’Malley, 2005), but rather, to offer a first step toward a synthesized understanding 

of a burgeoning research area. Within these limitations, this scoping review described the scope 

of foundational knowledge on early ethnic-racial awareness and identified several specific gaps 

that can be used to inform future research. 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
Conclusions 

The goal of this scoping review was to systematically identify and analyze the existing 

literature on ethnic-racial awareness and influences on its development among infants and 

toddlers. Ethnicity and race are clearly salient to infants and toddlers, and current research 

suggests that the first three years of life may provide a unique developmental window during 

which intentional ERS practices may be highly influential. Yet, how caregivers might 

intentionally practice ERS in the earliest years and the results of those practices on individual 

differences in development might produce are essentially unexplored areas of research. 

There is a need for more research to clarify how much infants and toddlers can 

distinguish between and associate meaning with different ethnic-racial identities. Moreover, 

additional studies are needed to identify the specific developmental trajectory of ethnic-racial 

awareness in association with age and individual differences that might be predicted by 

measurable influences. These gaps should serve as guidance for future systematic reviews and 

research studies on this topic.  

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
REFERENCES 

Anzures, G., Wheeler, A., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, A. M., Heron-Delaney, M., Tanaka, 
J. W., & Lee, K. (2012). Brief daily exposures to Asian females reverses perceptual 
narrowing for Asian faces in Caucasian infants. Journal of Experimental Child 
Psychology, 112(4), 484–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.04.005 

Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. 

International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 

Castelli, L., & Carraro, L. (2020). No evidence of racial discrimination among toddlers. 

Psicologia Sociale, 15(2), 285–292. https://doi.org/10.1482/96849 

Crisp, T., Knezek, S. M., Quinn, M., Bingham, G. E., Girardeau, K., & Starks, F. (2016). What’s 

on our bookshelves? The diversity of children’s literature in early childhood classroom 
libraries. Journal of Children’s Literature, 42(2), 29–42. 

DeJesus, J. M., Liberman, Z., & Kinzler, K. D. (2019). Early Origins of Identity: Infants’ and 
Children’s Thinking About Language and Culture. Zero to Three, 39(3), 10–16. 

Hayden, A., Bhatt, R. S., Kangas, A., Zieber, N., & Joseph, J. E. (2012). Race-based perceptual 
asymmetry in face processing is evident early in life. Infancy, 17(5), 578–590. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7078.2011.00098.x 

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? 

Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X 

Heron-Delaney, M., Anzures, G., Herbert, J. S., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Tanaka, J. W., Lee, 

K., & Pascalis, O. (2011). Perceptual training prevents the emergence of the other-race 
effect during infancy. PLOS ONE, 6(5), e19858. 
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019858 

Howard, L. H., Carrazza, C., & Woodward, A. L. (2014). Neighborhood linguistic diversity 

predicts infants’ social learning. Cognition, 133(2), 474–479. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.002 

Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006). 

Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for 
future study. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
1649.42.5.747 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Hughes, D., Cox, B., & Das, S. (2023). Growing up, learning race: An integration of research on 

cognitive mechanisms and socialization in context. Annual Review of Developmental 
Psychology, 5(Volume 5, 2023), 137–167. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-
120321-015718 

Katz, P. A., & Kofkin, J. A. (1997). Race, gender, and young children. In Developmental 

psychopathology: Perspectives on adjustment, risk, and disorder (619144828; 1997-
08446-003; pp. 74, Chapter xxi, 618 Pages). Cambridge University Press, New York, 
NY.  

Kelly, D., Quinn, P., Slater, A., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, M., Ge, L., & Pascalis, O. (2005). 

Three-month-olds, but not newborns, prefer own-race faces. Developmental Science, 
8(6), F31–F36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.0434a.x 

Kinzler, K. D., & Spelke, E. S. (2011). Do infants show social preferences for people differing in 

race? Cognition, 119(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.019 

Lopez, K. P., Juliana Menasce Horowitz, Rich Morin and Mark Hugo. (2015, June 11).  

Multiracial in America. Pew Research Center.  
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2015/06/11/multiracial-in-america/ 

Marcella & Howes (2015). Using naturalistic observation to study children’s engagement in 

early childhood classrooms. In Saracho. Handbook of Research Methods in Early  
Childhood Education. (Volume 2: Review of Research Methodologies. pp. 25-53). IAP. 

Markus, H. R. (2008). Pride, prejudice, and ambivalence: Toward a unified theory of race and 
ethnicity. American Psychologist, 63(8), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.63.8.651 

Mays, N., Roberts, E., & Popay, J. (2001). Synthesizing research evidence (N. Fulop, P. Allen, 

A. Clarke, & N. Black, Eds.; pp. 188–220). Routledge. 
https://researchonline.lshtm.ac.uk/id/eprint/15408/ 

Montoya, L., Westerlund, A., Troller-Renfree, S., Righi, G., & Nelson, C. A. (2017). The effect 
of heterogeneous race exposure during infancy. Cognitive Development, 42(SI), 74–83. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2017.02.014 

Powell, L. J., & Spelke, E. S. (2013). Preverbal infants expect members of social groups to act 
alike. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(41), E3965–E3972. 
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1304326110 

Priest, N., Walton, J., White, F., Kowal, E., Baker, A., & Paradies, Y. (2014). Understanding the 
complexities of ethnic-racial socialization processes for both minority and majority 
groups: A 30-year systematic review. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 
43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2014.08.003 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quinn, P. C., Lee, K., Pascalis, O., & Tanaka, J. W. (2015). Narrowing in categorical responding 

to other-race face classes by infants. Developmental Science, 19(3), 362–371. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12301 

Quinn, P. C., Uttley, L., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, M., Slater, A. M., & Pascalis, O. (2008). 
Infant preference for female faces occurs for same-but not other-race faces. Journal of 
Neuropsychology, 2(1, SI), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1348/174866407X231029 

Quintana, S. M. (1998). Children’s developmental understanding of ethnicity and race. Applied 

& Preventive Psychology, 7(1), 27–45. 
http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/S0962-1849(98)80020-6 

Raabe, T., & Beelmann, A. (2011). Development of ethnic, racial, and national prejudice in 

childhood and adolescence: A multinational meta-analysis of age differences: Age 
differences in prejudice. Child Development, 82(6), 1715–1737. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01668.x 

Richards, D. (2008). Handsearching still a valuable element of the systematic review. Evidence-

Based Dentistry, 9(3), 85. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6400602 

Rochat, P. (2023). Five levels of self-awareness as they unfold early in life. Consciousness and 

Cognition, 12(4),717–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8100(03)00081-3 

Rogers, L. O., Kiang, L., White, L., Calzada, E. J., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Byrd, C., Williams, C. 

D., Marks, A., & Whitesell, N. (2020). Persistent concerns: Questions for research on 
ethnic-racial identity development. Research in Human Development, 17(2–3), 130–153. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2020.1831881 

Ruck, M. D., Hughes, D. L., & Niwa, E. Y. (2021). Through the looking glass: Ethnic racial 

socialization among children and adolescents. Journal of Social Issues, 77(4), 943–963. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12495 

Skinner, A. L., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2019). Childhood experiences and intergroup biases among 

children. Social Issues and Policy Review, 13(1), 211–240. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12054 

Timeo, S., Farroni, T., & Maass, A. (2017). Race and color: two sides of one story? 

Development of biases in categorical perception. Child Development, 88(1), 83–102. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12564 

Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, 
M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., 
Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., … Straus, S. E. 
(2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and 
explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-
0850 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., Cross Jr., W. E., Rivas-Drake, D., Schwartz,  

S. J., Syed, M., Yip, T., Seaton, E., & Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st Century  
Study Group. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity during adolescence and into young  
adulthood: An integrated conceptualization. Child Development, 85(1), 21–39.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12196 

Waxman, S. R. (2021). Racial awareness and bias begin early: Developmental entry points, 

challenges, and a call to action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(5), 893–902. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211026968 

Williams, C. D., Byrd, C. M., Quintana, S. M., Anicama, C., Kiang, L., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., 

Calzada, E. J., Pabón Gautier, M., Ejesi, K., Tuitt, N. R., Martinez-Fuentes, S., White, L., 
Marks, A., Rogers, L. O., & Whitesell, N. (2020). A lifespan model of ethnic-racial 
identity. Research in Human Development, 17(2–3), 99–129. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2020.1831882 

Xiao, N. G., Wu, R., Quinn, P. C., Liu, S., Tummeltshammer, K. S., Kirkham, N. Z., Ge, L., 

Pascalis, O., & Lee, K. (2018). Infants rely more on gaze cues from own-race than other-
race adults for learning under uncertainty. Child Development, 89(3), e229–e244. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12798 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX A: SCOPING REVIEW SEARCH STRATEGY 

Table 4 

Scoping Review Search Strategy 

PsycInfo Including PsycArticles (ProQuest)  
Searched 3/6/23  
Keywords anywhere except full text 
# of 
Search 
1 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary 

Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies  

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 
8 

9 
10 

11 

MAINSUBJECT.EXACT.EXPLODE("Early Childhood Development") 
1 OR 2 

Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR 
perception OR attitude OR categor* 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Socialization”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Racial Bias”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Preferences") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Self Concept”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Face Perception”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Racial and Ethnic Attitudes”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Social Categorization”) 
4 OR 5 

Race OR ethni* OR racial 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Racial Identity”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT.EXPLODE(“Ethnic Identity”) 
7 OR 8 
3 AND 6 AND 9 

3 AND 6 AND 9 1990-present 

ERIC (ProQuest)  
Searched 3/6/23 
Keywords anywhere except full text 

# of Search 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary  

1 
2 

3 
4 

5 

6 

7 

Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT.EXPLODE(“infants”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Toddlers”) 
1 OR 2 
Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR 
perception OR attitude OR categor* 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Visual Perception") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Preferences") OR MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Racial 
Bias") OR MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Racial Identification") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Socialization") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Race Attitudes”) 
4 OR 5 

Race OR ethni* OR racial 

56 

# of 
Results  
186,144 

40,806 
197,109 

1,771,792 

141,812 

1,811,591 

215,633 
20,522 

215,633 
2,582 

2,362 

# of 
Results 
28,405 
18,626 

28,596 
539,824 

34,457 

546,017 

99,984 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 4 (cont’d) 

# of Search 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary  

8 

9 
10 

11 

MAINSUBJECT.EXACT(“Race”) OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT.EXPLODE(“Ethnic Groups”) 
7 OR 8 
3 AND 6 AND 9 

3 AND 6 AND 9 1990-present 

Education Source (EBSCO)  
Searched 3/6/23 

# of 
Search 
1 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary  

Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 
8 

9 

DE "Child psychology" OR DE "Infant psychology" OR DE “Child Development”  
1 OR 2 

Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR 
perception OR attitude OR categor* 
DE "Visual perception" OR DE "Perception" OR DE "Affiliation (Psychology)" OR 
DE "Attitude (Psychology)" OR DE "Group identity" OR “Attitudes of Ethnic Groups” 
4 OR 5 

Race OR ethni* OR racial 
3 AND 6 AND 7 

3 AND 6 AND 7 1990-present 

Web of Science Core Collection (Web of Science)  
Searched 3//6/23 

# of 
Results 
47,443 

120,056 
459 

331 

# of 
Results 
70,999 

52,164 
115,832 

643,604 

46,092 

643,821 

155,553 
1,136 

969 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary  

# of Results 

# of 
Search 
1 

2 
3 

4 

5 

6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 

TI=(Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies) 

AB=(Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies) 
1 OR 2 

TI=(Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR 
perception OR attitude OR categor*) 
AB=(Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR 
perception OR attitude OR categor*) 
4 OR 5 

TI=(Race OR ethni* OR racial) 
AB=(Race OR ethni* OR racial) 
7 OR 8 
3 AND 6 AND 9 
3 AND 6 AND 9 1990-present 

280,701 

382,409 
544,947 

1,082,048 

4,191,834 

4,656,216 

205,285 
407,967 
532,193 
1,819 
1,817 

# of 
Results 
18,038 

Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest)  
Searched 3/6/2023 
Keywords anywhere except full text 

# of 
Search 
1 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary  

Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 4 (cont’d) 

# of 
Search 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 
7 

8 

9 

10 
11 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary  

MAINSUBJECT.EXACT.EXPLODE("Infants") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Preschool Children") 
1 OR 2 

Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR 
perception OR attitude OR categor* 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Socialization") OR MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Attitudes") 
OR MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Perceptions") OR MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Self 
Concept") OR MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Prejudice") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Internalization") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Recognition (Psychology)") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Bias") 
4 OR 5 
Race OR ethni* OR racial 

MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Ethnic Identity") OR 
MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Ethnicity") OR MAINSUBJECT.EXACT("Race") 
7 OR 8 

3 AND 6 AND 9 
3 AND 6 AND 9 1990-Present 

Family and Society Studies Worldwide (EBSCO)  
Searched 3/6/23 

# of 
Search 
1 

2 

3 

4 
5 

Keywords and Controlled Vocabulary  

Infan* OR toddler* OR baby OR babies 

Sociali* OR recogni* OR identity OR preference OR raciali?ation OR bias OR 
perception OR attitude OR categor* 
Race OR ethni* OR racial 

1 AND 2 AND 3 
1 AND 2 AND 3 1990-Present 

# of 
Results 
5,321 

19,780 

551,902 

81,667 

563,350 
252,077 

66,560 

252,077 

923 
840 

# of 
Results 
112,978 

253,858 

58,118 

877 
740 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX B: SCOPING REVIEW INCLUDED PAPERS 

Table 5 

Papers Included in the Scoping Review with Key Characteristics 

Publication  
Year 
1991 

USA 

6mos 

Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

1997 

Nr 

6–36mos 

2004 

France 

3mos 

2005 

UK 

Newborns 

2006 

Israel  

3mos 

2007 

Nr 

3.5mos 

2007 

UK 

3mos, 6mos,  
9mos 

2007 

China 

3mos 

2008 

Germany 

2008 

2008 

Nr 

Nr 

3mos, 12mos, 
18mos 

2mos, 5mos,  
8mos, 11mos 

3mos 

2009 

USA 

12mos 

2009 

Nr 

8mos 

Langlois, J. H., Ritter, J. M., Roggman, L. A., & Vaughn, L. 
S. (1991). Facial diversity and infant preferences for attractive 
faces. Developmental Psychology, 27(1), 79–84.  
Katz, P. A., & Kofkin, J. A. (1997). Race, gender, and young 
children. In Developmental psychopathology: Perspectives on 
adjustment, risk, and disorder (619144828; 1997-08446-003; 
pp. 74, Chapter xxi, 618 Pages). Cambridge University Press, 
New York, NY. 
Sangrigoli, S., & de Schonen, S. (2004). Recognition of own-
race and other-race faces by three-month-old infants. Journal 
Of Child Psychology And Psychiatry, 45(7), 1219–1227.  
Kelly, D., Quinn, P., Slater, A., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, 
M., Ge, L., & Pascalis, O. (2005). Three-month-olds, but not 
newborns, prefer own-race faces. Developmental Science, 
8(6), F31–F36.  
Bar-Haim, Y., Ziv, T., Lamy, D., & Hodes, R. (2006). Nature 
and nurture in own-race face processing. Psychological 
Science, 17(2), 159–163.  
Hayden, A., Bhatt, R. S., Joseph, J. E., & Tanaka, J. W. 
(2007). The other-race effect in infancy: Evidence using a 
morphing technique. Infancy, 12(1), 95–104.  
Kelly, D. J., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Lee, K., Ge, L., & 
Pascalis, O. (2007). The other-race effect develops during 
infancy—Evidence of perceptual narrowing. Psychological 
Science, 18(12), 1084–1089.  
Kelly, D. J., Liu, S., Ge, L., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Lee, 
K., Liu, Q., & Pascalis, O. (2007). Cross-race preferences for 
same-race faces extend beyond the African versus Caucasian 
contrast in 3-month-old infants. Infancy, 11(1), 87–95.  
Schug, M. G. (2009). The ontogeny of group bias and 
prosocial behavior (622040496; 2009-99010-341; Issue 
AAI3321556).  
Rennels, J. L., & Davis, R. E. (2008). Facial experience 
during the first year. Infant Behavior & Development, 31(4), 
665–678. 
Quinn, P. C., Uttley, L., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, M., 
Slater, A. M., & Pascalis, O. (2008). Infant preference for 
female faces occurs for same-but not other-race faces. Journal 
of Neuropsychology, 2(1, SI), 15–26.  
Shutts, K., Kinzler, K. D., McKee, C. B., & Spelke, E. S. 
(2009). Social information guides infants’ selection of foods. 
Journal of Cognition and Development, 10(1–2), 1–17. 
Ferguson, K. T., Kulkofsky, S., Cashon, C. H., & Casasola, 
M. (2009). The development of specialized processing of 
own-race faces in infancy. Infancy, 14(3), 263–284.  

59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5 (cont’d) 

Publication  
Year 
2009 

Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

USA 

6mos–36mos 

Njoroge, W., Benton, T., Lewis, M. L., & Njoroge, N. M. 
(2009). What are infants learning about race? A look at a 
sample of infants from multiple racial groups. Infant Mental 
Health Journal, 30(5, SI), 549–567.  

2009 

China 

3mos, 6mos.  
9mos 

         Kelly, D. J., Liu, S., Lee, K., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, 
A. M., & Ge, L. (2009). Development of the other-race effect 
during infancy: Evidence toward universality? Journal of 
Experimental Child Psychology, 104(1), 105–114.  

2009 

2010 

2010 

nr 

nr 

nr 

9mos        

6mos, 9mos 

6mos 

2011 

Australia 

6mos, 9mos 

2011 

2011 

2011 

2011 

2011 

2012 

2012 

nr 

nr 

nr 

nr 

nr 

nr 

nr 

          Hayden, A., Bhatt, R. S., Zieber, N., & Kangas, A. (2009).    
 Race-based perceptual asymmetries underlying face 
processing in infancy. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(2), 
270–275. 
Anzures, G., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, A. M., & Lee, 
K. (2010). Categorization, categorical perception, and 
asymmetry in infants’ representation of face race. 
Developmental Science, 13(4), 553–564. 
Scott, L. S., & Monesson, A. (2010). Experience-dependent 
neural specialization during infancy. Neuropsychologia, 
48(6), 1857–1861. 
Heron-Delaney, M., Anzures, G., Herbert, J. S., Quinn, P. C., 
Slater, A. M., Tanaka, J. W., Kang, L., & Pascalis, O. (2011). 
Perceptual Training Prevents the Emergence of the Other 
Race Effect during Infancy. PLoS One, 6(5). 
Balas, B., Westerlund, A., Hung, K., & Nelson, C. A., III. 
(2011). Shape, color and the other-race effect in the infant 
brain. Developmental Science, 14(4), 892–900.  
Wheeler, A., Anzures, G., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Omrin, 
D. S., & Lee, K. (2011). Caucasian Infants Scan Own- and 
Other-Race Faces Differently. PLoS One, 6(4).  
Kinzler, K. D., & Spelke, E. S. (2011). Do infants show social 
preferences for people differing in race? Cognition, 119(1), 1–
9.  
Anzures, G., Pascalis, O., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., & Lee, 
K. (2011). Minimizing Skin Color Differences Does Not 
Eliminate the Own-Race Recognition Advantage in Infants. 
Infancy, 16(6), 640–654.  
Liu, S., Quinn, P. C., Wheeler, A., Xiao, N., Ge, L., & Lee, K. 
(2011). Similarity and difference in the processing of same- 
and other-race faces as revealed by eye tracking in 4- to 9-
month-olds. Journal Of Experimental Child Psychology, 
108(1), 180–189.  
Mahajan, N., & Wynn, K. (2012). Origins of “Us” versus 
“Them”: Prelinguistic infants prefer similar others. Cognition, 
124(2), 227–233.  
Xiao, W. S., Xiao, N. G., Quinn, P. C., Anzures, G., & Lee, 
K. (2013). Development of face scanning for own- and other-
race faces in infancy. International Journal of Behavioral 
Development, 37(2), 100–105.  

9mos 

6–10mos 

10mos, 2.5–3yrs 

6mos, 9mos 

4–9mos 

11.5mos 

6mos, 9mos 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                       
                      
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

Table 5 (cont’d) 

Publication  
Year 
2012 

2012 

2012 

nr 

nr 

nr 

2012 

USA 

2012 

nr 

2012 

Germany 

2012 

2013 

nr 

nr 

3mos 

3mos 

6mos 

8–10mos 

5mos, 9mos 

Uttley, L., de Boisferon, A. H., Dupierrix, E., Lee, K., Quinn, 
P. C., Slater, A. M., & Pascalis, O. (2013). Six-month-old 
infants match other-race faces with a non-native language. 
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 37(2), 84–
89. 
Ziv, T. (2013). An examination of the own-race preference in 
infancy (1411061134; 2013-99180-253; Issue AAI3543123). 
Vogel, M., Monesson, A., & Scott, L. S. (2012). Building 
biases in infancy: The influence of race on face and voice 
emotion matching. Developmental Science, 15(3), 359–372.  
Gaither, S. E., Pauker, K., & Johnson, S. P. (2012). Biracial 
and monoracial infant own-race face perception: An eye 
tracking study. Developmental Science, 15(6), 775–782.  
Anzures, G., Wheeler, A., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, 
A. M., Heron-Delaney, M., Tanaka, J. W., & Lee, K. (2012). 
Brief daily exposures to Asian females reverses perceptual 
narrowing for Asian faces in Caucasian infants. Journal of 
Experimental Child Psychology, 112(4), 484–495.  
Fassbender, I., Lohaus, A., Thomas, H., Teubert, M., 
Vierhaus, M., Spangler, S. M., Kolling, T., Goertz, C., Graf, 
F., Lamm, B., Gudi, H., Freitag, C., Keller, H., Knopf, M., & 
Schwarzer, G. (2012). Association Learning with Own- and 
Other-race Faces in three- and six-month old infants—A 
longitudinal study. Infant and Child Development, 21(4), 325–
337.  
Hayden, A., Bhatt, R. S., Kangas, A., Zieber, N., & Joseph, J. 
E. (2012). Race-Based Perceptual Asymmetry in Face 
Processing Is Evident Early in Life. Infancy, 17(5), 578–590.  
3–4mos, 9–10mos  Rennels, J. L., & Cummings, A. J. (2013). Sex differences in 

3mos, 6mos 

3.5mos 

2013 

USA 

8mos, 12mos 

2013 

Germany 

14mos 

2013 

USA 

9mos 

2013 

Germany 

3mos, 6mos,  
9mos 

facial scanning: Similarities and dissimilarities between 
infants and adults. International Journal of Behavioral 
Development, 37(2), 111–117. 
Powell, L. J., & Spelke, E. S. (2013). Preverbal infants expect 
members of social groups to act alike. Proceedings of the 
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of 
America, 110(41), E3965–E3972.  
Buttelmann, D., Zmyj, N., Daum, M., & Carpenter, M. 
(2013). Selective Imitation of In-Group Over Out-Group 
Members in 14-Month-Old Infants. Child Development, 
84(2), 422–428.  
Kim, H. I. (2014). The happy effect: The role of familiarity in 
the development of face processing during infancy 
(1523811981; 2014-99081-102; Issue AAI3564440).  
Spangler, S. M., Schwarzer, G., Freitag, C., Vierhaus, M., 
Teubert, M., Fassbender, I., Lohaus, A., Kolling, T., Graf, F., 
Goertz, C., Knopf, M., Lamm, B., & Keller, H. (2013). The 
Other-Race Effect in a Longitudinal Sample of 3-, 6-and 9-
Month-Old Infants: Evidence of a Training Effect. Infancy, 
18(4), 516–533.  

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5 (cont’d) 

Publication  
Year 
2014 

USA 

19mos 

Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

2014 

nr 

6mos, 9mos 

2014 

Cameroon    3mos, 6mos 

2014 

nr 

15mos 

2015 

USA 

19mos 

2015 

nr 

3–4mos, 9–10mos, 
12mos  

2015 

USA 

3mos, 10mos 

2015 

UK 

3–4mos, 8–9mos 

2015 

nr 

3mos, 6mos,  
9mos 

2015 

China 

3–9mos 

2016 

UK 

11mos 

2016 

Taiwan 

4mos, 6mos,  
9mos 

2016 

nr 

6mos, 9mos 

Howard, L. H., Carrazza, C., & Woodward, A. L. (2014). 
Neighborhood linguistic diversity predicts infants’ social 
learning. Cognition, 133(2), 474–479.  
Xiao, W. S., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., & Lee, K. (2014). 
Own‐ and other‐race face scanning in infants: Implications for 
perceptual narrowing. Developmental Psychobiology, 56(2), 
262–273.  
Fassbender, I., Lohaus, A., Thomas, H., Teubert, M., 
Vierhaus, M., Lamm, B., Freitag, C., Graf, F., Keller, H., 
Schwarzer, G., & Knopf, M. (2014). African Versus 
Caucasian Faces in a Visual Expectation Paradigm: A 
Longitudinal Study with German and Cameroonian Infants. 
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(8), 1273–1287. 
Burns, M. P., & Sommerville, J. A. (2014). “I pick you”: The 
impact of fairness and race on infants’ selection of social 
partners. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. 
Howard, L. H., Henderson, A. M. E., Carrazza, C., & 
Woodward, A. L. (2015). Infants’ and Young Children’s 
Imitation of Linguistic In-Group and Out-Group Informants. 
Child Development, 86(1), 259–275. 
Kayl, A. J. (2015). Examining the dynamics of infant face 
processing using state space grids (1870295717; 2016-47711-
285; Issue AAI10014633) [University of Nevada, Las Vegas]. 
Kim, H. I., Johnson, K. L., & Johnson, S. P. (2015). Gendered 
race: Are infants’ face preferences guided by intersectionality 
of sex and race? Frontiers In Psychology, 6.  
Tham, D. S. Y., Bremner, J. G., & Hay, D. (2015). In infancy 
the timing of emergence of the other-race effect is dependent 
on face gender. Infant Behavior & Development, 40, 131–138.  
Liu, S., Xiao, N. G., Quinn, P. C., Zhu, D., Ge, L., Pascalis, 
O., & Lee, K. (2015). Asian infants show preference for own-
race but not other-race female faces: The role of infant 
caregiving arrangements. Frontiers in Psychology, 6.  
Liu, S., Xiao, W. S., Xiao, N. G., Quinn, P. C., Zhang, Y., 
Chen, H., Ge, L., Pascalis, O., & Lee, K. (2015). 
Development of Visual Preference for Own- Versus Other-
Race Faces in Infancy. Developmental Psychology, 51(4), 
500–511.  
Begus, K., Gliga, T., & Southgate, V. (2016). Infants’ 
preferences for native speakers are associated with an 
expectation of information. Proceedings of the National 
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 
113(44), 12397–12402.  
Chien, S. H.-L., Wang, J.-F., & Huang, T.-R. (2016). 
Developing the Own-Race Advantage in 4-, 6-, and 9-Month-
Old Taiwanese Infants: A Perceptual Learning Perspective. 
Frontiers in Psychology, 7. 
Quinn, P. C., Lee, K., Pascalis, O., & Tanaka, J. W. (2016). 
Narrowing in categorical responding to other-race face classes 
by infants. Developmental Science, 19(3), 362–371.  

62 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5 (cont’d) 

Publication  
Year 
2016 

Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

nr 

9mos 

2016 

Germany 

2017 

2017 

nr 

nr 

3mos, 6mos,  
9mos 

9mos 

5mos, 10mos 

2017 

USA 

6mos, 8mos 

2017 

2017 

2017 

nr 

nr 

nr 

3mos, 6mos,  
9mos 

4mos, 6mos, 
8mos,10mos,  
12mos 

11mos 

2017 

China 

3mos–9mos 

2017 

2017 

2017 

nr 

nr 

nr 

6mos, 9mos 

10mos–11.5mos 

3.5mos, 6mos 

2018 

China 

7mos 

Markant, J., Oakes, L. M., & Amso, D. (2016). Visual 
selective attention biases contribute to the other-race effect 
among 9-month-old infants. Developmental Psychobiology, 
58(3), 355–365. 
Fassbender, I., Teubert, M., & Lohaus, A. (2016). The 
development of preferences for own-race versus other-race 
faces in 3-, 6- and 9-month-old Caucasian infants. European 
Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(1), 152–165.  
Liberman, Z., Woodward, A. L., & Kinzler, K. D. (2017). 
Preverbal Infants Infer Third-Party Social Relationships 
Based on Language. Cognitive Science, 41, 622–634.  
Pickron, C. B., Fava, E., & Scott, L. S. (2017). Follow My 
Gaze: Face Race and Sex Influence Gaze-Cued Attention in 
Infancy. Infancy, 22(5), 626–644.  
Ellis, A. E., Xiao, N. G., Lee, K., & Oakes, L. M. (2017). 
Scanning of own‐ versus other‐race faces in infants from 
racially diverse or homogenous communities. Developmental 
Psychobiology, 59(5), 613–627.  
Thomas, H., & Fassbender, I. (2017). Modeling Infant i’s 
Look on Trial t: Race-Face Preference Depends on i’s 
Looking Style. Frontiers In Psychology, 8.  
Montoya, L., Westerlund, A., Troller-Renfree, S., Righi, G., 
& Nelson, C. A. (2017). The effect of heterogeneous race 
exposure during infancy. Cognitive Development, 42(SI), 74–
83.  
Singarajah, A., Chanley, J., Gutierrez, Y., Cordon, Y., 
Nguyen, B., Burakowski, L., & Johnson, S. P. (2017). Infant 
attention to same-and other-race faces. Cognition, 159, 76–84.  
Xiao, N. G., Quinn, P. C., Liu, S., Ge, L., Pascalis, O., & Lee, 
K. (2018). Older but not younger infants associate own-race 
faces with happy music and other-race faces with sad music. 
Developmental Science, 21(2).  
Safar, K., Kusec, A., & Moulson, M. C. (2017). Face 
Experience and the Attentional Bias for Fearful Expressions 
in 6-and 9-Month-Old Infants. Frontiers In Psychology, 8. 
Singh, L., Loh, D., & Xiao, N. G. (2017). Bilingual Infants 
Demonstrate Perceptual Flexibility in Phoneme 
Discrimination but Perceptual Constraint in Face 
Discrimination. Frontiers in Psychology, 8.  
Heron-Delaney, M., Damon, F., Quinn, P. C., Meary, D., 
Xiao, N. G., Lee, K., & Pascalis, O. (2017). An adult face bias 
in infants that is modulated by face race. International 
Journal of Behavioral Development, 41(5), 581–587.  
Xiao, N. G., Wu, R., Quinn, P. C., Liu, S., Tummeltshammer, 
K. S., Kirkham, N. Z., Ge, L., Pascalis, O., & Lee, K. (2018). 
Infants Rely More on Gaze Cues From Own-Race Than 
Other-Race Adults for Learning Under Uncertainty. Child 
Development, 89(3), e229–e244. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5 (cont’d) 

Publication  
Year 
2018 

Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

nr 

4–6mos,  
10–12mos 

2018 

Malaysia 

3–4mos, 8–9mos 

2018 

nr 

3mos, 6mos,  
9mos, 12mos  

2018 

Germany 

9mos 

2018 

Israel 

14mos 

2018 

2018 

nr 

nr 

16mos 

6mos 

2018 

China 

6mos, 9mos 

2019 

nr 

11mos 

2019 

Canada 

6mos, 11mos 

2019 

Germany 

3mos, 6mos,  
9mos 

2019 

Singapore 

18mos–20mos 

2019 

Italy 

5mos, 9mos 

Minar, N. J., & Lewkowicz, D. J. (2018). Overcoming the 
other‐race effect in infancy with multisensory redundancy: 
10–12‐month‐olds discriminate dynamic other‐race faces 
producing speech. Developmental Science, 21(4), 1–12. 
Tham, D. S. Y., Woo, P. J., & Bremner, J. G. (2018). 
Development of the other-race effect in Malaysian-Chinese 
infants. Developmental Psychobiology, 61(1), 107–115.  
          Xiao, N. G., Mukaida, M., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Lee, K., 
& Itakura, S. (2018). Narrowing in face and speech perception 
in infancy: Developmental change in the relations between 
domains. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 176, 
113–127. 

Krasotkina, A., Goetz, A., Hoehle, B., & Schwarzer, G. 
(2018). Perceptual Narrowing in Speech and Face 
Recognition: Evidence for Intra-individual Cross-Domain 
Relations. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. 
Ferera, M., Baron, A. S., & Diesendruck, G. (2018). 
Collaborative and competitive motivations uniquely impact 
infants’ racial categorization. Evolution and Human Behavior, 
39(5), 511–519. 
Weatherhead, D., & White, K. S. (2018). And then I saw her 
race: Race-based expectations affect infants’ word processing. 
Cognition, 177, 87–97. 
Holvoet, C., Arciszewski, T., Scola, C., & Picard, D. (2018). 
Infants’ Visual Preferences for Prosocial Behavior and Other-
Race Characters at 6 Months: An Eye-Tracking Study. Sage 
Open, 8(2). 
Liu, S., Quinn, P. C., Xiao, N. G., Wu, Z., Liu, G., & Lee, K. 
(2018). Relations between scanning and recognition of own- 
and other-race faces in 6- and 9-month-old infants. Psych 
Journal, 7(2), 92–102. 
de Klerk, C. C. J. M., Bulgarelli, C., Hamilton, A., & 
Southgate, V. (2019). Selective facial mimicry of native over 
foreign speakers in preverbal infants. Journal of Experimental 
Child Psychology, 183, 33–47. 
May, L., Baron, A. S., & Werker, J. F. (2019). Who can speak 
that language? Eleven‐month‐old infants have language‐
dependent expectations regarding speaker ethnicity. 
Developmental Psychobiology, 61(6), 859–873. 
Fassbender, I., & Lohaus, A. (2019). Fixations and Fixation 
Shifts in Own-Race and Other-Race Face Pairs at Three, Six 
and Nine Months. Infant Behavior & Development, 57. 
Singh, L., Quinn, P. C., Xiao, N. G., & Lee, K. (2019). 
Monolingual but not bilingual infants demonstrate racial bias 
in social cue use. Developmental Science, 22(6). 
Timeo, S., Brigadoi, S., & Farroni, T. (2019). Perception of 
Caucasian and African faces in 5-to 9-month-old Caucasian 
infants: A functional near-infrared spectroscopy study. 
Neuropsychologia, 126, 3–9. 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5 (cont’d) 

Publication  
Year 
2019 

Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

USA 

9mos 

Kelsey, C. M., Krol, K. M., Kret, M. E., & Grossmann, T. 
(2019). Infants’ brain responses to pupillary changes in others 
are affected by race. Scientific Reports, 9. 

2020 

 UK 

2020 

Spain 

2020 

2020 

nr 

USA 

14mos 

6mos, 9mos, 12mos  Prunty, J. E., Jackson, K. C., Keemink, J. R., & Kelly, D. J. 
(2020). Caucasian infants’ attentional orienting to own- and 
other-race faces. Brain Sciences, 10(1). 
Colomer, M., & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2020). Language 
background shapes third-party communication expectations in 
14-month-old infants. Cognition, 202. 
Aktar, E., Raijmakers, M. E. J., & Kret, M. E. (2020). Pupil 
mimicry in infants and parents. Cognition and Emotion. 

6mos, 12mons, 
18mos 
7mos-12mos 

2020 

Singapore 

24mos 

2020 

nr 

6mos, 11mos 

2020 

Japan 

8mos-9mos 

2020 

Italy 

1–2yrs, 3–4yrs 

2020 

nr 

3mos, 6mos 

2021 

Australia  

10mos–12mos 

2021 

Canada 

24mos–26mos 

2021 

2021 

Canada 

4mos 

Canada 

18mos 

2021 

USA 

20mos-30mos 

Hwang, H. G., Debnath, R., Meyer, M., Salo, V. C., Fox, N. 
A., & Woodward, A. (2020). Neighborhood racial 
demographics predict infants’ neural responses to people of 
different races. Developmental Science. 
Singh, L., Tan, A. R. Y., Lee, K., & Quinn, P. C. (2020). 
Sensitivity to race in language comprehension in monolingual 
and bilingual infants. Journal of Experimental Child 
Psychology, 199. 
Keenan, B., & Markant, J. (2020). Differential sensitivity to 
species- and race-based information in the development of 
attention orienting and attention holding face biases in 
infancy. Developmental Psychobiology, 63(3), 461–469. 
Ujiie, Y., Kanazawa, S., & Yamaguchi, M. K. (2020). The 
Other-Race-Effect on Audiovisual Speech Integration in 
Infants: A NIRS Study. Frontiers In Psychology, 11. 
Castelli, L., & Carraro, L. (2020). No evidence of racial 
discrimination among toddlers. Psicologia Sociale, 15(2), 
285–292. 
Quinn, P. C., Lee, K., Pascalis, O., & Xiao, N. G. (2020). 
Emotional Expressions Reinstate Recognition of Other-Race 
Faces in Infants Following Perceptual Narrowing. 
Developmental Psychology, 56(1), 15–27. 
Liu, L., du Toit, M., & Weidemann, G. (2021). Infants are 
sensitive to cultural differences in emotions at 11 months. 
PLoS One, 16(9). 
Weatherhead, D., & White, K. S. (2021). Toddlers link social 
and speech variation during word learning. Developmental 
Psychology, 57(8), 1195–1209. 
Orena, A. J., & Werker, J. F. (2021). Infants’ mapping of new 
faces to new voices. Child Development, 92(5), e1048–e1060. 
Weatherhead, D., Kandhadai, P., Hall, D. G., & Werker, J. F. 
(2021). Putting mutual exclusivity in context: Speaker race 
influences monolingual and bilingual infants’ word‐learning 
assumptions. Child Development, 92(5), 1735–1751. 
Qin, B. (2021). Children’s processing of spoken language in 
our social world (2636172989; 2022-13251-112) [State 
University of New York at Buffalo]. 

65 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5 (cont’d) 

Publication  
Year 
2021 

Country 

Age of Sample 

Reference 

Germany 

6mos, 9mos 

2021 

nr 

18mos, 24mos 

2021 

Japan 

5–6mos, 8–9mos 

2021 

California 

20mos 

2021 

France 

9mos, 12mos 

2021 

Israel 

11mos 

2021 

USA 

14mos 

2021 

Germany 

12mos 

2021 

California 

7.5mos–10.5mos 

2021 

USA 

6–7mos 

2022 

nr 

10mos 

2022 

France 

9mos, 12mos 

2022 

Singapore 

3mos, 6mos,  
6mos-7mos,  
9mos 

Krasotkina, A., Götz, A., Höhle, B., & Schwarzer, G. (2021). 
Perceptual narrowing in face- and speech-perception domains 
in infancy: A longitudinal approach. Infant Behavior & 
Development, 64, 9. 
Laible, D., Karahuta, E., Stout, W., Van Norden, C., Cruz, A., 
Neely, P., Carlo, G., & Agalar, A. E. (2021). Toddlers’ 
helping, sharing, and empathic distress: Does the race of the 
target matter? Developmental Psychology, 57(9), 1452–1462. 
Ujiie, Y., Kanazawa, S., & Yamaguchi, M. K. (2021). The 
other-race effect on the McGurk effect in infancy. Attention, 
Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(7), 2924–2936.  
Pronovost, M. A., & Scott, R. M. (2021). 20-month-olds Use 
Social Categories to Make Inductive Inferences about Agents’ 
Preferences. Journal of Cognition and Development, 22(2), 
328–342. 
de Boisferon, A. H., Kubicek, C., Gervain, J., Schwarzer, G., 
Loevenbruck, H., Vilain, A., Fort, M., Meary, D., & Pascalis, 
O. (2021). Language familiarity influences own-race face 
recognition in 9-and 12-month-old infants. Infancy. 
Ferera, M., Pun, A., Baron, A. S., & Diesendruck, G. (2021). 
The effect of familiarity on infants’ social categorization 
capacity. PLoS One, 16(3). 
Haynes, K. T., Kelsey, C. M., & Grossmann, T. (2021). 
Probing infants’ sensitivity to pupil size when viewing eyes. 
Infancy, 26(2), 291–302. 
Krasotkina, A., Goetz, A., Hoehle, B., & Schwarzer, G. 
(2021). Bimodal familiarization re-sensitizes 12-month-old 
infants to other-race faces. Infant Behavior & Development, 
62. 
Oakes, L. M., DeBolt, M. C., Beckner, A. G., Voss, A. T., & 
Cantrell, L. M. (2021). Infant Eye Gaze While Viewing 
Dynamic Faces. Brain Sciences, 11(2). 
Quinn, P. C., Balas, B. J., & Pascalis, O. (2021). 
Reorganization in the representation of face-race categories 
from 6 to 9 months of age: Behavioral and computational 
evidence. Vision Research, 179, 34–41. 
Roth, K., & Reynolds, G. (2022). Neural correlates of 
subordinate-level categorization of own- and other-race faces 
in infancy. Acta Psychologica, 230.  
Damon, F., Quinn, P. C., Méary, D., & Pascalis, O. (2022). 
Asymmetrical responding to male versus female other‐race 
categories in 9‐ to 12‐month‐old infants. British Journal of 
Psychology. 
Singh, L., Phneah, K. T., Wijayaratne, D. C., Lee, K., & 
Quinn, P. C. (2022). Effects of interracial experience on the 
race preferences of infants. Journal of Experimental Child 
Psychology, 216, 18.  

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CHAPTER 3: STUDY 2 – 

JUSTICE-BASED ETHNIC-RACIAL SOCIALIZATION AMONG CAREGIVERS OF 

TODDLERS: INITIAL MEASUREMENT DEVELOPMENT TO EXAMINE BELIEFS 

AND PRACTICES  

Introduction 

Ethnic-racial identity (ERI) can be understood as the way in which individuals 

conceptualize and connect with their personal, ethnic heritage and racial background (Umaña-

Taylor et al., 2014; Williams et al., 2020). ERI is cultivated among young children through 

ethnic-racial socialization (ERS). ERS refers to the messages that children receive regarding 

ethnicity and race (Hughes et al., 2006; Quintana, 1998). Although all young children experience 

ERS from primary caregivers, the process is not neutral (Bussey & Jemal, 2022). The ERS 

approach employed by caregivers can cultivate healthy ERI development, or harmful ERI 

development. Healthy ERI refers to having awareness of and positive regard for one’s ERI and 

the ability to recognize and process the nuances of what ERI means in a racialized society. 

Unhealthy ERI refers to the opposite: a lack of awareness and positive regard for one’s ERI and 

an inability to recognize or process what ERI means in a racialized society.  

Healthy ERI is developed through an active and ongoing commitment to building ethnic-

racial awareness, engaging in self-reflection, and acknowledging systemic positionality in terms 

of how one's various social identities (e.g., race, gender, ability, citizenship, education, etc.) are 

positioned proximally or distally to social privilege (Bonilla-Silva, 2019; Rogers et al., 2020; 

Williams et al., 2020). As expressed in Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, this work demands 

critical evaluation and continuous effort (1978).  

67 

 
 
 
 
 
Evidence of healthy ERI in the U.S. context includes the demonstration of (1) 

understanding the constructed meaning of ethnicity and race, (2) acknowledging how disparate 

outcomes among ethnic-racial groups are connected to systemic functions and (3) active 

participation in resisting and dismantling such systemic functions that perpetuate ethnic-racial 

injustice (Iruka et al., 2020; Kendi, 2019, Meltzoff & Gilliam, 2024). Harmful ERI can be 

understood as the lack or absence of the aforementioned understanding, acknowledgement, and 

participation. The consequences of not developing a healthy ERI among individuals with 

minoritized identities include lower academic achievement, more health-related problems, and 

increased expression of negative internalized and externalized behaviors (Rivas-Drake et al., 

2014).  

Among white identifying populations, a lack of healthy ERI can result in an increase of 

unconscious bias, and a lack of positionality awareness, both of which can contribute to the 

development of racist beliefs and engagement in discriminatory actions (Hazelbacker et al., 

2021; Pahlke et al., 2012; Perszyk et al., 2019). Further, unhealthy ERI among white individuals 

with Euro-American backgrounds is demonstrated by erasure of individual, ethnic heritage and a 

diminished sense of the ways in which human thriving is interconnected among people of all 

ethnicities and races (Efird et al., 2024; Malat et al., 2018; Wilkerson, 2020). Among all 

populations, not developing a healthy ERI is associated with the perpetuation of internalized and 

externalized racism that contributes to the maintenance of white supremacy and inequitable 

systemic outcomes (Gilliam, 2005; Iruka et al., 2020; Jemal & Bussey, 2022; Kendi, 2019). 

The development of a healthy ERI is neither linear nor contained within any one period 

of development or level of ecological systems. Rather, it starts in infancy, unfolds in association 

with the influence of multiple bioecological systems, and continues throughout one's lifetime 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
(Garcia-Coll et al.,1996; Spencer et al, 1997; Williams et al., 2020). The lifespan model of 

ethnic-racial identity illustrates the simultaneous and dynamic nature of this process (Williams et 

al., 2020). Throughout the first months and years of life, initial awareness of ERI emerges and 

early perceptions begin to take shape (Williams et al., 2020). This perception development is 

influenced by a myriad of ERS processes. Previous studies have made a distinction between a 

color evasive approach to ERS (formerly known as the colorblind approach) which focuses on 

human similarities while ignoring differences and avoiding acknowledgement of racial injustice, 

and a color conscious approach that intentionally names race and discusses the impacts of 

individual and institutional racism (Hughes et al., 2023; Abaied et al., 2022, Hagerman 2014, 

Zucker & Patterson, 2018).  

While the color conscious approach is associated with more positive outcomes 

(Hazelbaker et al. 2022, Woolverton & Marks 2022), it is not enough. I propose that the 

cultivation of healthy ERI requires the color conscious approach to go a step further by 

integrating an explicit social justice framework. Although ERS often functions as a dyadic 

process between caregivers and children, when a justice approach is taken, it can also seed 

systems change. As Ferman states, “...through critical analysis, the social justice framework 

provides a pathway to collective action that challenges systems of oppression” (2020, p. 438). 

Thus, justice-based ethnic-racial socialization (JBERS) is a specific approach to ERS that is 

derived from the integration of a color conscious ideology within a social justice framework. 

This approach can be part of systems change efforts, and its utilization can start with the very 

youngest children. 

69 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Purpose of the Present Study 

The purpose of this study is to describe two new measures developed to assess caregiver 

capacity to engage in JBERS with infants and toddlers based on caregiver beliefs and practices. 

The two new measures introduced are not intended to directly measure JBERS as a construct, 

rather they are designed to measure the factors that indicate caregiver capacity to engage in the 

JBERS approach. I posit that JBERS is comprised of the ERI awareness that caregivers 

demonstrate, the accountability caregivers attach to learning about ERI, and the ERS practices 

that caregivers engage in directly with young children. Taken together, the two measures can 

indicate if a caregiver is high or low in capacity to engage in JBERS as an approach to ERS.  

I posit that caregiver capacity to engage in JBERS requires accountability in relation to 

individual and systemic ERI awareness (beliefs) and action (ERS practices). I outline the 

development process of two measures and examine the factorial structure of the JBERS construct 

by considering the subcomponents assessed in each measure together. Possible measure 

adaptations and future directions are also discussed. 

Ethnic-Racial Socialization in Early Childhood 

ERI as a Developmental Process 

Although ethnic-racial bias is not typically observable until the preschool years (Castelli 

& Carraro, 2020; Kinzler & Spelke, 2011), the awareness, perceptions, and attitudes that proceed 

the development of bias based on ethnicity and race begin to form in infancy and toddlerhood 

(Hayden 2012; Kelly et al. 2005; Liu et al. 2015). Williams and colleagues (2020) describe the 

precursor to ERI as ethnic-racial priming. Ethnic-racial priming occurs when infants first notice 

the characteristics of others that are related to ethnicity and race such as skin color, phenotypic 

features, and the sounds of spoken language (e.g., accent, pitch, and cadence), and begin to 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
connect ethnicity and race to the categories of characteristics that are familiar and characteristics 

that are novel (Williams et al., 2020). Socialization practices and the nature of exposure to 

people of diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds influence how infants make meaning of ethnicity 

and race and set the foundation for ERI development (Williams et al., 2020). 

The period of ethnic-racial priming begins in the earliest months of life and the impact of 

exposure is measurable among infants by 3 months of age when they can distinguish between 

same and other-race faces (Kelly et al. 2005, Fassbender et al. 2016, Liu et al. 2015). Before 

their first birthday, infants express preference for people who have features they are familiar with 

while demonstrating a decreased ability to differentiate facial images of other-race individuals 

(Heron-Delaney et al. 2017; Krasotkina et al. 2018; Zubler et al. 2022).  

In the toddler years, children begin to understand themselves as distinct from others while 

using visible characteristics to categorize people they encounter. Language development also 

flourishes in toddlerhood including the use of color names and the understanding of words that 

describe basic emotions (Berk, 2021; Derman-Sparks and Edwards 2020). As young children 

grow in their sense of self and deepen their understanding of how others are both like and not 

like them (Repacholi & Gopnik 1997; Rochat, 2003; Rochat & Striano 2000), caregivers can 

intentionally support the development of healthy ERI through JBERS (Curenton et al., 2020; 

Gillen-O'Neel al., 2022; Hazelbaker et al., 2022; Rogers et al., 2020; Waxmen, 2021). Elevating 

proactive work in the domain of early childhood provides opportunities to intervene in the 

developmental period when ethnic-racial awareness initially develops, and biases first emerge 

(Bigler & Liben, 2007). 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Caregivers as Agents of ERS 

While there are innumerable socializing influences that impact racial priming, primary 

caregivers tend to have the most prominent role in ERS throughout the early childhood years 

(Hughes et al., 2023). Parents and other primary caregivers (including close family and 

community members) tend to be the initial socializing agents in the lives of young children with 

the most consistent influence (Hughes et al., 2023). For the most part, primary caregivers 

determine where young children go, who they are exposed to, and what messages they receive 

about ethnicity and race (Hughes et al., 2023). In the United States, there is often a distinctive 

difference between the messages provided by caregivers from minoritized backgrounds and 

white caregivers (Hughes et al., 2023). Caregivers of color tend to transmit cultural pride to their 

children along with messages intended to keep them safe through preparation for bias and 

promotion of mistrust (Hughes et al., 2006). White caregivers typically deliver more egalitarian 

focused messages that de-emphasize the significance of ethnicity and race. The color evasive 

approach often employed by white caregivers is rooted in a denial of systemic racism and an 

abduction of responsibility to participate in addressing racial injustice (Hughes et al, 2023, Scott 

et al., 2024). 

ERS in early childhood directly influences how children come to develop their own 

ethnic-racial identity and consider that of others (Byrd, 2012; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014; 

Williams et al., 2020). In a doll play study conducted by Njoroge and colleagues (2009), both 

white and Asian infants and toddlers demonstrated clear preference for dolls with specific 

phenotypic features. Researchers have also found that Black and white children between the ages 

of 3 and 6 display white-biased choice behavior (Murray & Mandata 2002), and studies show 

that as early as preschool, children predict that white people will have more prestigious jobs, 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
wealth and resources compared to Black people (Elenbaas & Killen 2016, Mandalaywala et al., 

2020). These findings were consistent not only among white children, but also among Black, 

Latiné, and multiracial children (Elenbaas & Killen 2016, Mandalaywala et al., 2020). Such 

findings are not inevitable (Garcia Coll et al., 1996). Ethnic-racial bias is learned (Hughes & 

Chen, 1999; Katz, 2003). Thus, ERS is a critical process that has the potential to facilitate or 

disrupt the development of ethnic-racial bias (Castelli et al., 2021; Waxman, 2021). 

 Research demonstrates that color conscious ERS is associated with positive outcomes for 

children from all ethnic-racial backgrounds (e.g., Mesman et al., 2022; Hughes et al, 2007). For 

example, a study of 7-and-8-year-old children who identified as Black, Latiné, or multiracial 

found that ERI, most notable ERI commitment (“... a subjective sense of belonging to one’s 

ethnic–racial group or groups” Marcelo & Yates, 2018, p. 9) moderated the relation between 

experiencing ethnic-racial discrimination and both internalized and externalized behavior 

problems as measured by the Test Observation Form (TOF; McConaughy & Achenbach, 2004). 

Another study with 4- to 6-year-old Latiné children found that positive feelings toward one’s 

ethnic-racial group were associated with fewer behavior problems (Serrano-Villar & Calzada, 

2016). A color conscious approach to ERS is beneficial to both children of color and white 

children as it has been associated with more positive self-concept among African American 

children (Swanson et al, 2009), and less anti-Black bias among white children (Hughes et al., 

2007). 

To promote young children learning to value their own ethnic-racial identity (ERI) and 

that of others, it is critical for caregivers to understand how healthy views of ethnicity and race 

are fostered within the context of child development, why it is important to engage in ERS early, 

and what specific ERS practices are impactful (Hughes et al., 2006; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2014; 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
Williams et al., 2020). ERS that disrupts the development of bias is meaningful given that racism 

is rooted in bias, and systems are created by individuals–all of whom hold some form of bias as a 

natural outcome of how the brain processes social experiences to group people into categories, 

then makes meaning of experiences by associating those categories of people with patterns and 

social constructs in ways that vary in accuracy and affect (Harris & Cossins, 2020). ERS in the 

earliest years of a child’s life can be one component in the multifaceted strategy to disrupt the 

development of harmful ethnic-racial bias, especially when guided by a social justice framework 

(Branch & Newcombe, 1986; Katz, 2003; White-Johnson et al., 2010).  

Justice-Based Ethnic-Racial Socialization 

Kucskar Mitsch and colleagues (2023) define social justice as a “theoretical framework 

that focuses on actions and beliefs that attempt to address oppression and inequity while 

promoting access, participation, and freedom for all individuals” (p.494). Applying a justice 

orientation requires the inclusion of a critical perspective that calls both individuals and systems 

to account. JBERS messages focus on acknowledging the historic events that enabled the 

colonization and oppression of targeted communities of color along with the current mechanisms 

that promote and sustain white supremacy in the United States. JBERS messages encourage 

individuals to discover and reflect on their own intersectional identities with the goals of 

understanding their personal history, honoring their shared humanity and individual dignity, and 

identifying their unique positionality and responsibility in relation to advancing anti-racism and 

social justice. This approach facilitates the development of a healthy ERI.  

JBERS is an approach to ERS that integrates a social justice framework with a color 

conscious approach. JBERS centers justice by elevating individual positionality and 

responsibility in dismantling white supremacy. This is not to absolve institutions and systemic 

74 

 
 
 
 
 
power structures of culpability, but the intent is to acknowledge that individuals contribute to the 

creation and maintenance of oppressive systems (Jamal & Bussey, 2022). Thus, individuals are 

capable of contributing to systems level change.   

Present Study 

While infancy and toddlerhood are sensitive periods for developing a sense of self and 

other, much of the research on ERS to date has been focused on adolescents when the ERS 

processes are more prevalent and explicit as adolescents consciously engage with identity 

development processes (Hughes et al., 2006; Murry et al., 2007; Rivas-Drake et al., 2014). Some 

studies include children in kindergarten and preschool (Blanchard et al., 2019; Derman-Sparks & 

Edwards, 2020; Dunbar et al., 2017); however, the current literature on caregiver-delivered ERS 

among infants and toddlers from diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds is limited. Although previous 

research has begun to include infants and toddlers from diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds (e.g., 

Blanchard, et al., 2019; Contreras et al., 2021; Njorge et al., 2009), there remains a need for 

further exploration of ERS delivered by caregivers to infants and toddlers and more 

consideration how a social justice framework might be integrated in that deliver. 

This study aims to support ERS research among caregivers of infants and toddlers by 

developing two new measures that will assess (1) ERS beliefs and (2) ERS practices within this 

population. This study also aims to further define JBERS through the application of exploratory 

factor analysis with both new measures. We hypothesize that the underlying factors of caregiver 

capacity to engage in JBERS will be personal and systemic ERI awareness (awareness), a sense 

of accountability to learn about ERI (accountability), and a commitment to engage in social 

justice advancing actions in both the home and community environments (action). We 

hypothesize that these will be separate factors which are positively associated with each other. 

75 

 
 
 
 
 
Measure Development 

Method 

To develop the Ethnic-Racial Identity Awareness and Beliefs Development (ERIAL) 

scale and the Early Ethnic-Racial Socialization Practices (EERSP) scale, six existing ERS 

measures were examined. Items that were determined to be developmentally relevant for 

children birth to 3 years were included and adapted to reflect clear and current language 

(Appendix A). Novel items were also developed to fill in gaps. For example, the original item on 

the Multicultural Youth Socialization scale, “[My parent] Told me to be proud of the way I look 

(e.g., skin color, hair color/type)” was adapted to be, “I talk to my child about the way they look 

(e.g., skin color, hair color/texture) in positive ways”, and the following novel item was added to 

include a focus on positively describing the way that people from ethnic-racial background that 

differ from the target child look, “I talk to my child about the way people from other ethnic-

racial backgrounds look (e.g., skin color, hair color/texture) in positive ways”.   

Novel items were also added to examine how caregivers thought about their ethnic 

identify (“My ethnicity is an important aspect of my personal identity”), their racial identity 

(“My race is an important aspect of my personal identity”), intersectionality (“When I think 

about all of my personal identities together (race, class, education, income, ability, gender, 

sexuality, religion, citizenship), I believe that some of them give me advantages and some of 

them hinder me in American society.”), systemic racism (“In the U.S., ethnicity-race impacts a 

person's access to social systems such as education, employment, housing, health care, and 

public safety.”), beliefs about ERS (“I believe that it is important for my child to learn about the 

ethnic background[s] of our family”), and beliefs about justice, (“I actively think about ways that 

I can help my child learn about racial justice.”). 

76 

 
 
 
 
 
Novel items were developed to access caregivers’ sense of accountability to engage in 

JBERS (“As a caregiver, I have a responsibility to teach my child about ethnicity and race.”, 

“Helping my child understand the impact of ethnic-racial identity in the United States is a 

significant priority for me” ), and the practices they intentionally engaged in related to their 

community environment (“I intentionally choose to live in a neighborhood that has significant 

ethnic-racial diversity.”, “I intentionally choose to live in a neighborhood where my child can 

regularly see and interact with other people who look like them”). 

Five ERS content experts representing variation in the ages and the ethnic-racial 

backgrounds of the populations they study, provided feedback on the draft measure. Content 

expert feedback was applied to finalize items. Based on expert feedback, the items were split into 

two measures, one focused on beliefs (the ERIAL scale) and one focused on practices (the 

EERSP scale). While both beliefs and practices are hypothesized to be factors that define 

JBERS, they were best organized in two distinct measures within the same survey. Upon 

finalization of the draft measures, a pilot survey was conducted with 4 primary caregivers of 

infants and toddlers. Two were caregivers to white toddlers, one was a caregiver to a Black 

toddler, and one was a caregiver to multiracial, Black, Native, and Latiné toddlers. Three 

caregivers then participated in a focus group to provide feedback on item interpretation (the 4th 

provided feedback electronically). Caregiver feedback was used to create the final versions of the 

two new measures.  

To test the reliability and validity of the new measures, existing, validated measures were 

included in the final survey in addition to the ERIAL scale and the EERSP scale. To test for 

convergent validity, the Ethnic Identity Scale (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2004) was included along 

with three measures developed by Rohrbach (2014) and used by Williams & Banerjee (2021): a 

77 

 
 
 
 
 
colorblind ideology measure, a fear of discussing race measure, and a prejudice concerns 

measure. To test for divergent validity, the Digital Screen Exposure Questionnaire (2021) was 

included.  

Participants 

The sample consisted of 154 caregivers of toddlers. To be eligible for participation in the 

study, individuals had to be (1) 18 years of age or older, (2) be the parent or legal guardian of a 

child who they identified as being Black/African American, white/Euro-American, or 

Multiracial/Black and one or more other races, (3) the target child had to be between 12 and 36 

months of age at the time of enrollment, (4) caregivers had to have been born in the United 

States., (5) currently live in the United States, and (6) be able to speak, understand, and read 

English. Caregivers ranged in age from 20 to 50 years old with the mean caregiver age being 

33.5 years. The age range of the toddlers was 12 to 36 months with the mean age being 26 

months. Having a bachelor's degree was the most common education level reported for 

caregivers (30%), and the most frequently reported income range was $50,000 to $100.00 

(23.5%).  

Participants were primarily from two regions within one midwestern state in the United 

States. The sample also included participants from other states across the United States. Most 

frequent number of children caregivers reported having was 2 (42.3%) and 98.7% identified as 

the biological parent of the target child (n = 148) with 2 caregivers identifying as foster parents 

and one identifying as an adoptive parent. Seventy-nine percent of participants reported their 

ethnic-racial identity (ERI; n = 122). Of those who reported ERI, 47% identified as African 

American (n = 58), 50% identified as white (n = 61), 2% as Latiné (n = 2), and 1% as Middle 

Eastern (n = 1). 34% of the target children were identified as African American/Black (n = 52), 

78 

 
 
 
 
 
34% were identified as Euro-American/white, and 32% were identified as Multiracial/Black and 

one or more other races (n = 50). 

Recruitment 

Participants were originally recruited through a flyer posted on social media with a link 

and QR code providing anonymous access to an electronic survey. Significant bot activity and 

over 100 fraudulent responses were detected on the first day of recruitment. In response, data 

collection was temporarily paused. To ensure credible data collection, the open link was closed, 

and an updated flyer was created that included an email address through which potential 

participants could request an individualized survey link (see Appendix B). The electronic survey 

was password protected, and validation items were added to the survey. The updated flyer was 

distributed to childcare centers, and early childhood serving organizations. Additionally, 

snowball sampling was utilized to recruit participants. The institutional review board overseeing 

this study approved a protocol to access response validity and exclude all responses deemed 

fraudulent.  

A purposive sampling strategy was utilized with potential participants being asked to 

complete a screening survey to ensure that they meet all inclusion criteria and that the sample 

would be approximately equal between the three included ethnic-racial groups of the target 

children. The goal of this purposive sampling strategy was to reflect multiple perspectives in 

relation to ERS beliefs and practices among caregivers of toddlers and preserve the ability to 

compare group differences (Creswell & Poth, 2018). 

Procedure 

This study was approved by the institutional review board of Michigan State University 

and the institutional review board of Grand Rapids Community College. Data were collected 

79 

 
 
 
 
 
through an electronic survey that was created on the Qualtrics platform. The three-month data 

collection occurred from July 8, 2024, through October 9, 2024. The survey included screening 

questions, demographic questions, and seven measures for a total of 146 items. Participants 

always saw screening questions first, followed by the seven measures in alternating order. 

Demographic questions were always seen last by participants (see Appendix C). Once started, 

there was no time limit for survey completion which allowed participants to start responding to 

survey questions, pause and come back at their convenience. The time participants took from 

starting the survey to completing it ranged from 10 minutes to 13.5 hours with an average 

completion time of 43 minutes. Participants received a $25 electronic Visa gift card upon 

completion of the survey.   

Measures 

Ethnic-Racial Identity Awareness and Learning (ERIAL) Scale. The ERIAL scale 

(see Appendix D) was created to assess ERS beliefs among caregivers of infants and toddlers. 

The ERIAL initially included 21 items explained by three subscales: personal awareness (5 

items), systemic awareness (10 items), and accountability (6 items). Participants were given a 4-

point Likert scale for response options from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (4). Sample 

items include, “I believe that it is important for my child to know about the history of their own 

racial background[s]” (personal awareness), “Laws and policies in the United States are applied 

differently based on people's ethnic-racial identity” (systemic awareness), and “It is important for 

me to utilize my identity advantages to advocate for others who don't have the same advantages” 

(accountability).  

Early Ethnic-Racial Socialization Practices (EERSP) Scale. The EERSP scale (see 

Appendix E) was created to assess ERS practices among caregivers of infants and toddlers. The 

80 

 
 
 
 
 
EERSP initially included 29 items with four subscales: diverse exposure (6 items), intentional 

teaching (8 items), home environment (9 items), and community environment (4 items). The 

subscales of diverse exposure and parental teaching included response options on a 4-point rating 

scale from never (1) to very frequently (4). Sample items include, “I purposefully provide my 

child with opportunities to interact with individuals from diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds.” 

(diverse exposure), and “I actively intervene and offer alternatives when I encounter my child 

showing harmful ethnic-racial bias in their talk or play” (intentional teaching). The 4-point rating 

scale response options for the home environment subscale and the community environment 

subscale ranged from does not describe me at all (1) to describes me very well (4). Sample items 

include, “I have dolls or toy people with dark brown skin in my home for my child to play with” 

(home environment), and “I intentionally choose to have my child in child care and school 

settings that are ethnically and racially diverse” (community environment). 

Convergent Validity Measures. Ethnic identity was assessed with the 17-item Ethnic 

Identity Scale (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2004; see Appendix F). The Ethnic Identity Scale is 

comprised of three subscales measuring exploration (7 items), resolution (4 items), and 

affirmation (6 items). A 4-point rating scale is used to score each item from “Does not describe 

me at all” (1) to “Describes me very well” (4). Sample items included “I have attended events 

that have helped me learn more about my ethnicity” (exploration), “I have a clear sense of what 

my ethnicity means to me” (resolution), and “I wish I were of a different ethnicity” (affirmation, 

reverse scored; Umaña-Taylor et al., 2004). All negatively worded items were reverse coded so 

that positive responses indicate awareness of and positive regard for personal ERI.    

Colorblind Ideology Measure. The six question Colorblind Ideology Measure 

(Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021; see Appendix G) explores how parents dismiss 

81 

 
 
 
 
 
ethnic-racial differences or avoid discussions of ethnic-racial identity. Statements such as, “I like 

to think I don't see race or ethnicity” are scored from 1 (very strongly disagree) to 6 (very 

strongly agree). All items were reverse coded so that positive responses indicate a rejection of 

the colorblind ideology. 

Fear of Discussing Race Measure. The five question Fear of Discussing Race Measure 

(Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021; see Appendix H) measure explores how parental 

fear of discussing ethnicity and race with their child. Statements such as, “I don't know what to 

say about race that will lead my child to be unbiased” were scored from 1 (very strongly 

disagree) to 6 (very strongly agree). All items were reverse coded so that positive responses 

indicate an openness to discussing race. 

Prejudice Concerns Measure. The six question Prejudice Concerns Measure (Rohrbach, 

2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021; see Appendix I) explores parental concerns about their 

children demonstrating discriminatory behavior (4 questions) or being discriminated against (2 

questions). whether their child would be discriminated against. Five of the six questions were 

included with one (“I am concerned that something my child does or says when talking to 

someone of a different race or ethnicity might be labeled prejudice”) being excluded based on 

developmental relevance for the sample population. Parents indicated the extent to which they 

agreed with statements such as “I am concerned that something my child does or says when 

talking to someone of a different race or ethnicity might be labeled as prejudice”, or “When I see 

someone of a different race or ethnicity, I worry that they will act prejudiced towards my child.” 

Items were scored on a 6-point scale from 1 (very strongly disagree) to 6 (very strongly agree). 

While included in the full caregiver survey for this study, the Prejudice Concerns Measure was 

not included in the data analysis. This decision was made based on the determination that the 

82 

 
 
 
 
 
measure was investigating caregiver concerns about child behavior and child experience. These 

constructs differ from those the caregiver belief constructs that the ERIAL intends to measure, 

and the Caregiver practices constructs the EERSP intends to measure. 

Divergent Validity Measure. The Digital Screen Exposure Questionnaire (DSEQ; Kaur 

et al., 2021; see Appendix J) examines digital screen exposure duration and behaviors in relation 

to both educational and non-educational content. For this study, 18 of the DSEQ’s 28 items were 

included. Included items were selected based on developmental relevance for caregivers of 

infants and toddlers. All negatively worded items were reverse coded so that positive responses 

indicate the opinion that it is beneficial for toddlers to watch learning shows on digital devices.  

Analytic Approach 

Exploratory Factor Analysis  

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was selected as the analytic approach for this study. 

Mplus version 8.6 (Muthén & Muthén, 2021) was used to conduct an EFA for each measure 

separately (the 21-items ERIAL scale and the 29-item EERSP scale). Four-point Likert or rating 

scales were used on all items (see Table 6). Four of the items on the ERIAL scale were worded 

negatively (item 6, 12, 13, and 15). These items were reverse coded so that all items could be 

scored positively. The first 15 items on the EERSP scale asked participants to indicate the 

frequency with which they engaged in each statement (see Table 11). On the EERSP scale items 

16-29, participants were asked to indicate the extent to which the item described them (see Table 

11). All items on the EERSP scale were worded positively.  

All items in both data sets were treated as categorical. Thus, a weighted least squares 

estimator with mean and variance adjustment (WLSMV) was used for the EFA analysis. The 

oblique rotation, geomin, was selected based on the assumption that there would be correlation 

83 

 
 
 
 
 
between the variables (Browne, 2001). Model fit was examined using four fit indices: 

comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of 

approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). Model fit was 

considered acceptable with a CFI and TFI greater than or equal to .95, RMSEA less than or equal 

to .08, and SRMR equal to or less than .08 (Hu & Bentler, 1999).  

 Based on the underlying theory that informed the measure design, a four-factor solution 

(Identity, Black Experience, Racism, and Personal Responsibility) or a two-factor solution 

(Awareness and Accountability) was anticipated for the ERIAL scale. A four-factor solution 

(Diverse Exposure, Intentional Teaching, Home, Environment, and Community Environment) or 

a one-factor solution (Action) were anticipated for the EERSP scale. 

ERIAL Scale Analysis 

Results 

A total of 21 items on the initial ERIAL scale were included in the data analysis. The data 

set had very low missingness (see Table 6) with the lowest covariance coverage being .980. A 

Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) approach was applied to any items with missing 

data allowing for all data to be included in the analysis. One case had missing data on all ERIAL 

scale variables. That case was not included in the analysis resulting in a total of 153 cases being 

included in the data analysis. Participant responses skewed positively on all items with 88% of 

responses being in the Agree or Strongly Agree categories (see Table 6).   

Table 6 

Pre-factor Analysis Descriptive Statistics for All ERIAL Scale Items (n = 153) 

Item 

1 

My race is an important aspect 
of my personal identity. 

Valid  Missing  Strongly 
Disagree 
6 

153 

0 

Disagree  Agree  Strongly 

37 

57 

Agree 
53 

Mean 
Score 
3.03 

84 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Valid  Missing  Strongly 
Disagree 

Disagree  Agree  Strongly 

Agree 

Mean 
Score 

3.06 

3.22 

66 

63 

51 

65 

Table 6 (cont’d) 

Item 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

My ethnicity is an important 
aspect of my personal identity. 
When I think about all of my 
personal identities together 
(race, class, education, income, 
ability, gender, sexuality, 
religion, citizenship), I believe 
that some of them give me 
advantages and some of them 
hinder me in American society. 
I believe that it is important for 
my toddler to learn about the 
ethnic background[s] of our 
family. 
I believe that it is important for 
my toddler to know about the 
history of their own racial 
background[s]. 
American society treats Black 
people fairly. (RC) 
It is important to remember the 
experiences of Black people 
who were enslaved. 
Schools should be required to 
teach all children about Black 
history. 
Black people and White people 
don't always have the same 
opportunities in American 
society. 
In the U.S., race and ethnicity 
impact a person's access to 
social systems such as 
education, employment, 
housing, health care, and public 
safety. 
Laws and policies in the United 
States are applied differently 
based on people's ethnic-racial 
identity. 
Racism is not as bad today as it 
used to be. (RC) 

152 

153 

1 

0 

153 

0 

153 

0 

150 

153 

3 

0 

152 

1 

152 

1 

153 

0 

151 

2 

152 

1 

0 

13  All ethnic and racial groups are 

153 

treated the same in American 
society. (RC) 

14  All ethnic and racial groups 

152 

1 

should be valued equally in our 
society. 
Talking a lot about racism is 
not helpful. (RC) 

15 

151 

2 

7 

6 

3 

2 

5 

1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

6 

5 

0 

6 

85 

28 

19 

5 

6 

14 

3 

37 

7 

66 

79 

3.44 

58 

87 

3.50 

58 

44 

73 

105 

3.33 

3.65 

113 

152 

3.73 

51 

91 

3.51 

10 

57 

85 

3.48 

14 

60 

75 

3.38 

48 

3 

4 

69 

54 

29 

91 

2.80 

3.51 

29 

119 

3.76 

11 

86 

48 

3.17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 6 (cont’d) 

Item 

16 

17 

18 

19 

I intentionally learn about race 
and racism through educational 
media (e.g., books, social 
media, movies, television 
shows). 
I learn about the impact of 
racism by listening to the 
stories of other people in my 
life who come from diverse 
ethnic-racial backgrounds. 
It is important for me to utilize 
my identity advantages to 
advocate for others who don't 
have the same advantages. 
I actively seek opportunities to 
enhance my own understanding 
of racial justice. 

21 

20  Helping my toddler understand 
the impact of ethnic-racial 
identity in the United States is a 
significant priority for me. 
I believe that it is important for 
my toddler to learn about 
people who have an ethnic-
racial background that is 
different from my toddler's 
ethnic-racial background. 

Valid  Missing  Strongly 
Disagree 
6 

153 

0 

Disagree  Agree  Strongly 

25 

69 

Agree 
53 

Mean 
Score 
3.10 

153 

0 

152 

1 

152 

1 

153 

0 

152 

1 

2 

1 

1 

0 

1 

14 

85 

52 

3.22 

12 

79 

60 

3.30 

28 

18 

80 

43 

3.09 

73 

62 

3.29 

3 

70 

78 

3.48 

Frequency 
Totals (%) 

66 (2%) 

346 
(10%) 

1387 
(41%) 

1551 
(47%) 

Grand 
Mean 
3.31 

ERIAL Scale EFA 

 Results of the EFA analysis using WLSMV with an oblique rotation on the 21-item 

ERIAL scale indicated that there were 5 eigenvalues greater than 1 (see Table 7). However, 

examination of the scree plot suggested a 3-factor solution (see Figure 6). Model fit indices were 

examined. Neither a 1-factor solution or a 2-factor solution had support for retention (1-factor 

solution: CFI = .77; TLI = .74; RMSA = .18; SRMR = .18; 2-factor solution: CFI = .89; TLI = .86; 

RMSA= .13; SRMR = .11). The 3-factor solution had modest support for retention with adequate 

model fit: CFI =.95; TLI = .94; RMSEA = .09; SRMR = .07. Both the 4-factor solution (CFI =.97; 

86 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TLI = .96; RMSEA = .07; SRMR = .06) and the 5-factor solution (CFI = .98; TLI= .97; RMSEA 

= .06; SRMR = .05) indicated an improved model fit over the 3-factor solution. However, the 3-

factor solution was retained based on better theoretical alignment and the support of the scree 

plot.     

Table 7 

ERIAL Scale Eigenvalues Table (n =153) 

Eigenvalues 

% of Variance 

Figure 6  

Scree Plot with 21 ERIAL items. 

7.43 

43.7 

2.74 

16.1 

1.91 

11.2 

0.80 

0.70 

8.7 

4.7 

Interpretation of the factors based on the rotated factor loadings supported the 3-factor 

solution. However, three items had loadings below .45 (Identities, Slavery, and Racism), and one 

Item had a loading below .4 (All_Value). Further examination of these items suggested that the 

wording may have been confusing to participants. For example, the Identities item was intended 

to ask participants about their awareness of intersectional identities using non-academic terms, 

but the statement was long and likely difficult to understand (Identities statement: “When I think 

about all of my personal identities together (race, class, education, income, ability, gender, 

87 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
sexuality, religion, citizenship), I believe that some of them give me advantages and some of 

them hinder me in American society”). Similarly, in an effort to improve the word choice, the 

item statement, “It is important to remember the experience of Black slavery”, from the Cultural 

and Racial Experiences of Socialization (CARES) measure (Edwards & Stevenson, 2015) was 

adapted to read as, “It is important to remember the experience of the impact of the enslavement 

of Black people”. While the intention was to use more human-centered language, the statement 

may have been less clear to participants. The Racism item statement was likely too subjective as 

it did not specify referencing overt racism, covert racism, or both. Similarly, the use of the word 

should rather than are in the All_Value item (“All ethnic and racial groups should be valued 

equally in our society”.) may have made the item less clear to participants.    

The EFA analysis was run again with the four identified items removed. This reduction 

of items simplified the model and improved the factorial structure (CFI = .97; TLI = .95; 

RMSA= .091; SRMR = .054). The final 3-factor solution included 17 items (see Table 8). The 3 

factors were correlated as expected, but the correlation was modest which supports the 

conclusion that each factor is also distinct from the others (see Table 4). 

Table 8 

ERIAL Scale Factor Loadings Diagram (n = 153) 

Items 

My race is an important aspect of my personal identity. 

My ethnicity is an important aspect of my personal identity. 

I believe that it is important for my toddler to learn about the ethnic 

background[s] of our family. 

Factor 

1 

.87 

.87 

.83 

2 

3 

-.08 

-.19 

.02 

-.04 

.01 

.15 

I believe that it is important for my toddler to know about the history 

.83 

.01 

.24 

of their own racial background[s]. 

American society treats Black people fairly. 

Schools should be required to teach all children about Black history. 

.02 

.11 

-.84 

.57 

.19 

.20 

Item 
No. 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

88 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
Table 8 (cont’d) 

Item 

No. 

7 

8 

Items 

Factor  

1 

2 

3 

Black people and White people don't always have the same 

.02 

.90 

-.14 

opportunities in American society. 

In the U.S., race and ethnicity impact a person's access to social 

-.03 

.87 

.07 

systems such as education, employment, housing, health care, and 

public safety. 

9 

Laws and policies in the United States are applied differently based on 

.07 

.83 

.02 

people's ethnic-racial identity. 

10 

11 

12 

All ethnic and racial groups are treated the same in American society. 

Talking a lot about racism is not helpful. 

I intentionally learn about race and racism through educational media 

(e.g., books, social media, movies, television shows). 

-.05 

.06 

-.12 

-.75 

-.62 

.00 

.08 

-.07 

.89 

13 

I learn about the impact of racism by listening to the stories of other 

-.06 

.14 

.61 

people in my life who come from diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds. 

14 

It is important for me to utilize my identity advantages to advocate for 

-.03 

.14 

.76 

others who don't have the same advantages. 

15 

I actively seek opportunities to enhance my own understanding of 

.03 

-.05 

.94 

racial justice. 

16 

Helping my toddler understand the impact of ethnic-racial identity in 

.15 

.17 

.71 

the United States is a significant priority for me. 

17 

I believe that it is important for my toddler to learn about people who 

.07 

-.07 

.78 

have an ethnic-racial background that is different from my toddler's 

ethnic-racial background. 

Note. Bolding indicates highest factor loading. 

Table 9 

Factor Correlations for Exploratory Factor Analysis of ERIAL Scale (n = 153). 

Factor 

1 (Personal ERI Awareness) 

2 (Systemic ERI Awareness 
3 (Accountability to Learning about ERI) 

1 

- 

.24 
.32 

2 

- 
.54 

3 

- 

89 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
Factor 1: Personal ERI Awareness 

Factor 1 contained 4 items (items 1, 2, 3, and 4), which appeared to measure the valuing 

of personal ERI for both the caregiver (e.g., “My race is an important aspect of my personal 

identity.”), and the child (e.g., “I believe that it is important for my toddler to learn about the 

ethnic background[s] of our family”). Factor 1 was named Personal ERI Awareness, and a 

follow-up reliability analysis found factor 1 to have strong internal consistency (𝛼 = .82). 

Factor 2: Systemic ERI Awareness 

Factor 2 contained 7 items (items 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11), which appeared to measure an 

understanding of systemic racism (e.g., “ Laws and policies in the United States are applied 

differently based on people's ethnic-racial identity.”), and the impacts of race and ethnicity in 

relation to social systems in the United States (e.g., “In the U.S., race and ethnicity impact a 

person's access to social systems such as education, employment, housing, health care, and 

public safety.”). Factor 2 was named Systemic ERI Awareness. A follow-up reliability analysis 

found factor 2 to have strong internal consistency (𝛼 = .84). 

Factor 3: Accountability to Learning about ERI 

Factor 3 contained 6 items (items 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17), which appeared to measure 

caregivers’ commitment to learning about ERI (e.g., “I intentionally learn about race and racism 

through educational media (e.g., books, social media, movies, television shows.”), and helping 

their children learn about ERI (e.g. “Helping my toddler understand the impact of ethnic-racial 

identity in the United States is a significant priority for me.”). Factor 3 was named 

Accountability to Learning about ERI, and a follow-up reliability analysis found factor 3 to have 

strong internal consistency (𝛼 = .87). 

90 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EERSP Scale Analysis 

A total of 29 items on the initial EERSP scale were included in the data analysis, and the 

data set included 154 cases. The EERSP scale data set also had very low missingness (see Table 

5) with the lowest covariance coverage being .942. The FIML approach was applied to any items 

with missing data allowing for all data to be included in the analysis. Participant responses 

skewed positively on all items with 70% of responses being in the Agree or Strongly Agree 

categories (see Table 10).   

Table 10 

Pre-factor Analysis Descriptive Statistics for All EERSP Scale Items (n = 154) 
Frequently 
Valid  Missing 

Rarely 

Never 

Item 

21 

73 

Very 
Frequently 
56 

Mean 
Score 
3.19 

153 

1 

153 

1 

3 

5 

33 

79 

36 

2.95 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

I read books to my toddler 
in which people from my 
toddler's ethnic-racial 
background[s] are 
represented. 
I take my toddler to 
places/events that reflect 
my toddler's ethnic-racial 
heritage (e.g., museums, 
community events, 
restaurants, grocery stores). 
I read books to my toddler 
that provide positive 
representation of 
Black/African American 
people. 
I take my toddler to 
places/events that reflect 
the ethnic-racial heritage of 
other groups (e.g., 
museums, community 
events, restaurants, grocery 
stores). 
When discussing people 
and images of people with 
my toddler, I draw 
attention to and discuss the 
differences in physical 
features such as skin color, 
hair texture, and eye shape. 

153 

1 

1 

23 

87 

42 

3.11 

153 

1 

2 

42 

82 

27 

2.88 

153 

1 

22 

60 

50 

21 

2.46 

91 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 10 (cont’d) 

         Item 

Valid  Missing 

Never 

Rarely 

Frequently 

153 

153 

1 

1 

7 

14 

41 

34 

77 

75 

Very 
Frequently 
28 

Mean 
Score 
2.82 

30 

2.79 

6 

8 

7 

I actively think about ways 
that I can help my toddler 
learn about racial justice. 
I talk to my toddler about 
the way people from other 
ethnic-racial backgrounds 
look in positive ways (e.g., 
skin color, hair 
color/texture). 
I purposefully provide my 
toddler with opportunities 
to interact with individuals 
from diverse ethnic-racial 
backgrounds. 
I talk to my toddler about 
the celebrations and 
cultural holidays of other 
ethnic-racial groups. 
I help my toddler recognize 
others' feelings and 
emotions (e.g., During a 
peer interaction, I might 
say, "He's crying, it looks 
like he's sad." While 
reading a book, I might 
say, "She has a big smile, 
she looks happy.") 
11  When discussing people 

10 

9 

and images of people with 
my toddler, I describe the 
similarities in physical 
features such as skin color, 
hair texture, and eye shape. 
people's ethnic-racial 
identity. 
I include my toddler in 
cultural celebrations and 
holidays of my toddler's 
ethnic-racial group[s]. 
I actively intervene when I 
encounter my toddler 
showing harmful ethnic-
racial bias in talk or play. 
I talk to my toddler about 
the way my toddler looks 
in positive ways (e.g., skin 
color, hair color/texture). 

12 

13 

14 

152 

2 

7 

32 

66 

47 

3.01 

152 

153 

1 

1 

10 

60 

58 

24 

2.63 

3 

8 

58 

84 

3.46 

153 

1 

17 

53 

60 

23 

2.58 

153 

148 

153 

1 

6 

1 

7 

32 

66 

48 

3.01 

19 

25 

65 

39 

2.84 

3 

15 

47 

88 

3.44 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 10 (cont’d) 

         Item 

Valid  Missing 

Never 

Rarely 

Frequently 

153 

1 

3 

10 

64 

Very 
Frequently 
76 

Mean 
Score 
3.39 

15 

I am intentional about 
helping my toddler 
recognize the feelings and 
emotions of others who 
have an ethnic-racial 
background that is different 
from my toddler. (e.g., 
During a peer interaction, I 
might say, "He's crying, it 
looks like he's sad." While 
reading a book, I might 
say, "She has a big smile, 
she looks happy.") 
Item 

19 

18 

17 

16  My home is decorated with 
things that reflect my 
toddlers ethnic-racial 
background[s]. 
I have dolls or toy people 
with dark brown skin in my 
home for my toddler to 
play with. 
I have children's books in 
my home that include 
Black people as the main 
characters of the story. 
I intentionally choose to 
have my child in child care 
and school settings that are 
ethnically and racially 
diverse. 
I pay attention to the way 
that people are represented 
in the media my toddler 
watches. 
I intentionally choose to 
live in a neighborhood 
where my toddler can 
regularly see and interact 
with other people who look 
like my toddler. 
I have children's books in 
my home that include 
images of Black and 
Brown people. 

21 

22 

20 

Valid  Missing 

151 

150 

151 

149 

3 

4 

3 

5 

Does 
Not 
Describe 
Me at 
All 
28 

Describe
s Me a 
Little 

Describes 
Me Well 

Describes 
Me Very 
Well 

Mean 
Score 

60 

45 

18 

2.35 

13 

23 

51 

63 

3.09 

3 

19 

58 

71 

3.30 

24 

26 

48 

51 

2.85 

150 

4 

5 

21 

61 

63 

3.21 

150 

4 

38 

45 

35 

32 

2.41 

151 

3 

2 

18 

53 

78 

3.37 

93 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 10 (cont’d) 

Item 

Valid  Missing 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

151 

150 

148 

149 

150 

148 

151 

I have dolls or toy people 
with white/very light skin 
in my home for my toddler 
to play with. 
I have photographs that 
include images of family 
and friends from diverse 
ethnic-racial backgrounds 
in my home that my 
toddler can see. 
I have adult books in my 
home that include Black 
people as the main 
character of the story. 
I intentionally choose to 
live in a neighborhood that 
has significant ethnic-racial 
diversity. 
I have dolls or toy people 
with light brown skin in 
my home for my toddler to 
play with. 
I have adult books in my 
home that are written by 
Black authors. 
I intentionally choose to 
have my toddler in 
childcare and school 
settings where my toddler 
can be around other people 
who look like my toddler. 

3 

4 

6 

5 

4 

6 

3 

Does 
Not 
Describe 
Me at 
All 
14 

Describe
s Me a 
Little 

Describes 
Me Well 

Describes 
Me Very 
Well 

Mean 
Score 

35 

57 

45 

2.88 

26 

30 

43 

51 

2.79 

16 

28 

48 

56 

2.97 

30 

44 

42 

33 

2.52 

10 

28 

66 

46 

2.99 

15 

38 

32 

44 

47 

38 

54 

2.95 

31 

2.41 

EERSP Scale EFA  

Frequency 
Totals (%) 

361 (9%) 

916 
(21%) 

1651 
(39%) 

1310 
(31%) 

Grand 
Mean 
2.82 

Results of the EFA analysis using WLSMV with an oblique rotation on the 29-item 

EERSP scale indicated that there were 6 eigenvalues greater than 1 (see Table 11). However, 

examination of the scree plot suggested a 1-factor solution or a 5-factor solution (see Figure 7). 

Examination of model fit indices demonstrated strong support for a 6-factor solution (CFI = .97; 

TLI = .95; RMSA= .06; SRMR = .05), however; a 5-factor solution provided improved 

94 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
interpretability and better theoretical alignment. A 5-factor solution was also supported by the 

scree plot and demonstrated adequate model fit: CFI = .96; TLI = .93; RMSEA = .07; SRMR 

= .05. 

Table 11 

EERSP Scale Eigenvalues  

Eigenvalues 

% of Variance 

8.02 

40.6 

2.64 

13.4 

2.15 

10.9 

1.71 

1.25 

0.86 

0.68 

8.7 

6.3 

4.4 

3.4 

In the 5-factor solution, five items had loadings below .45 (Intervene, Decor, Div_Media, 

Div_Photos, and Beautiful). When the EFA analysis was run again with these items removed, the 

model fit was slightly worse (CFI =.95; TLI = .92; RMSEA = .08; SRMR = .05), and two items 

(L_dolls and LB_dolls) grouped together on one factor in a way that was uninterpretable. Thus, 

these two items were also removed.  

The model fit was improved after the seven identified items were removed (CFI =.97; 

TLI = .94; RMSEA = .08; SRMR = .05), however, the results indicated one additional item 

(Teach_Just) with a loading under .4. The Teach_Just item was also removed. The final 5-factor 

solution included 21 items (see Table 12) and demonstrated adequate model fit (CFI =.97; TLI 

= .94; RMSEA = .08; SRMR = .05). 

Figure 7 

Scree Plot with 29 EERSP Scale Items 

95 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 12 

EERSP Scale Factor Loadings Diagram 

Item 
No. 
1 

Items 

I read books to my toddler in which people from 

my toddler's ethnic-racial background[s] are 

represented. 

Factor 

1 

.50 

2 

3 

4 

5 

.43 

.04 

-.00 

.05 

2 

I take my toddler to places/events that reflect my 

.72 

.26 

.02 

-.11 

-.11 

toddler's ethnic-racial heritage (e.g., museums, 

community events, restaurants, grocery stores). 

3 

4 

5 

I read books to my toddler that provide positive 

.55 

.58 

.04 

.08 

.02 

representation of Black/African American people. 

I include my toddler in cultural celebrations and 

.73 

.05 

-.20 

.16 

.00 

holidays of my toddler's ethnic-racial group[s]. 

I take my toddler to places/events that reflect the 

.72 

-.01 

.02 

-.06 

.26 

ethnic-racial heritage of other groups (e.g., 

museums, community events, restaurants, grocery 

stores). 

6 

I purposefully provide my toddler with 

.37 

-.07 

.04 

.13 

.47 

opportunities to interact with individuals from 

diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds.  

7 

8 

I talk to my toddler about the celebrations and 

.63 

-.03 

.10 

-.03 

.21 

cultural holidays of other ethnic-racial groups. 

I talk to my toddler about the way people from 

.31 

-.15 

.49 

.07 

.11 

other ethnic-racial backgrounds look in positive 

ways (e.g., skin color, hair color/texture). 

9 

I help my toddler recognize others' feelings and 

.03 

.03 

.14 

.86 

-.02 

emotions (e.g., During a peer interaction, I might 

say, "He's crying, it looks like he's sad." While 

reading a book, I might say, "She has a big smile, 

she looks happy.") 

10 

When discussing people and images of people 

.06 

.11 

.81 

.11 

-.11 

with my toddler, I describe the similarities in 

physical features such as skin color, hair texture, 

and eye shape. 

96 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 12 (cont’d) 

Item 

Items 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Factor 

No. 

11 

When discussing people and images of people 

.31 

-.15 

.50 

.07 

.19 

with my toddler, I draw attention to and discuss 

the differences in physical features such as skin 

color, hair texture, and eye shape. 

12 

I am intentional about helping my toddler 

.15 

-.01 

-.02 

.85 

recognize the feelings and emotions of others who 

have an ethnic-racial background that is different 

from my toddler. (e.g., During a peer interaction, I 

might say, "He's crying, it looks like he's sad." 

While reading a book, I might say, "She has a big 

smile, she looks happy.") 

13 

. 

13 

I have dolls or toy people with dark brown skin in 

-.12 

.60 

.21 

.26 

.13 

my home for my toddler to play with. 

14 

I have children's books in my home that include 

.00 

.87 

.03 

.25 

-.03 

Black people as the main characters of the story. 

15 

I have children's books in my home that include 

-.04 

.87 

-.08 

.32 

-.04 

images of Black and Brown people. 

16 

I have adult books in my home that are written by 

.17 

.86 

-.05 

-.24 

.06 

Black authors. 

17 

I have adult books in my home that include Black 

.05 

.82 

.05 

-.14 

.14 

people as the main character of the story. 

18 

I intentionally choose to have my toddler in 

.16 

.08 

-.25 

.06 

.78 

childcare and school settings that are ethnically 

and racially diverse. 

19 

I intentionally choose to live in a neighborhood 

-.11 

.05 

.09 

-.06 

.81 

where my toddler can regularly see and interact 

with other people who look like my toddler. 

20 

I intentionally choose to live in a neighborhood 

-.02 

-.04 

.10 

.02 

.81 

that has significant ethnic-racial diversity. 

21 

I intentionally choose to have my toddler in 

-.00 

.24 

-.06 

-.07 

.76 

childcare and school settings where my toddler can 

be around other people who look like my toddler. 

Note. Bolding indicates highest factor loading. 

97 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Similar to the factorial structure of the ERIAL, the 5 factors of the EERSP were 

correlated yet distinct (see Table 13). 

Table 13 

Factor Correlations for Exploratory Factor Analysis of EERSP Scale (N = 154). 

Factor 

1 (Color Conscious Exposure) 
2 (Affirmation of Blackness) 
3 (Discussion of Physical Features) 
4 (Cultivation of Empathy) 
5 (Curation of Window and Mirror Environments) 

1 

- 
.21 
.50 
.18 
.27 

2 

- 
.18 
.01 
.33 

3 

4 

- 
.23 
.30 

- 
.09 

5 

- 

Factor 1: Color Conscious Exposure 

Factor 1 contained 5 items (items 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7), which appeared to measure the 

intentional exposure to diverse environments based on a color conscious ideology (e.g. “I take 

my toddler to places/events that reflect the ethnic-racial heritage of other groups (e.g., museums, 

community events, restaurants, grocery stores.”). Factor 1 was named Color Conscious 

Exposure, and a follow-up reliability analysis found factor 1 to have strong internal consistency 

(𝛼 = .82). 

Factor 2: Affirmation of Blackness 

Factor 2 contained 6 items (items 3, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17), which appeared to measure 

intentional exposure to positive representations of Black/African American people and culture 

(e.g. “I read books to my toddler that provide positive representation of Black/African American 

people.”). Factor 2 was named Affirmation of Blackness, and a follow-up reliability analysis 

found factor 2 to have strong internal consistency (𝛼 = .87). 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Factor 3: Discussion of Physical Features 

Factor 3 contained 3 items (items 8, 10, and 11), which appeared to measure clear 

acknowledgement and discussion of the differences and similarities between the physical 

features of individuals (e.g., “I talk to my toddler about the way people from other ethnic-racial 

backgrounds look in positive ways (e.g., skin color, hair color/texture.”). Factor 3 was named 

Discussion of Physical Features, and a follow-up reliability analysis found factor 3 to have 

excellent internal consistency (𝛼 = .81). 

Factor 4: Cultivation of Empathy 

Factor 4 contained 2 items (items 12 and 9), which appeared to measure caregivers’ 

intentionally teaching their children to recognize the feelings and emotions of others (e.g., “I am 

intentional about helping my toddler recognize the feelings and emotions of others who have an 

ethnic-racial background that is different from my toddler.”). Factor 4 was named Cultivation of 

Empathy, and a follow-up reliability analysis found factor 4 to have strong internal consistency 

(𝛼 = .83). 

Factor 5: Curation of Window and Mirror Environments 

Factor 5 contained 5 items (items 6, 18, 19, 20 and 21), which appeared to measure 

caregivers’ intentional decisions to have their children in environments where they are able to 

see other who look different than them (windows; e.g., “I intentionally choose to have my 

toddler in childcare and school settings that are ethnically and racially diverse.”), and in 

environments where their children are able to see others who look similar to them (mirrors; e.g., 

“I intentionally choose to have my toddler in childcare and school settings where my toddler can 

be around other people who look like my toddler.”). Inspired by the work of Rudine Sims Bishop 

99 

 
 
 
 
 
(1990), Factor 5 was named Curation of Window and Mirror Environments. A follow-up 

reliability analysis found factor 5 to have excellent internal consistency (𝛼 = .82). 

Scoring Reliability and Validity of Factors 

Sum scores of salient items were used to score factors, and the reliability of each factor 

was tested using Cronbach's Alpha (Chronbach, 1951) with values greater than .5 considered 

acceptable and values greater than .8 considered strong. Further, convergent and discriminant 

validity were tested by examining correlations between each factor and other previously 

validated measures. Correlation values between .1 and .29 are considered weak, values 

between .3 and .49 are considered moderate, and values .5 or greater are considered strong 

(Field, 2024, Gignac & Szodorai 2016). 

Reliability and Validity Results 

SPSS Statistics for Macintosh, Version 28.0 was utilized to examine the reliability and 

validity of each factor. All factors on the ERIAL scale demonstrated strong reliability (see Table 

14).  

Table 14 

Reliability of ERIAL Scale Factors 

Factor 

1 (Personal ERI Awareness) 
2 (Systemic ERI Awareness 
3 (Accountability to Learning about ERI) 

.821 
.842 
.870 

All factors on the EERSP scale also demonstrated strong reliability with the exception of factor 1 

which demonstrated acceptable reliability (see Table 15). 

100 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 15 

Reliability of EERSP Scale Factors 

Factor 

1 (Color Conscious Exposure) 
2 (Affirmation of Blackness) 
3 (Discussion of Physical Features) 
4 (Cultivation of Empathy) 
5 (Curation of Window and Mirror Environments) 

.775 
.878 
.811 
.826 
.823 

I hypothesized that Personal ERI Awareness would have a moderate, positive correlation 

with both the Colorblind Ideology Measure and the Fear of Discussing Race Measure based on 

the assumption that individuals with higher Personal ERI Awareness are less likely to hold a 

color evasive ideology or demonstrate a fear of discussing race (Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & 

Banerjee, 2021).   

Systemic ERI Awareness was hypothesized to have a weak, positive correlation with the 

Ethnic Identity Scale because individuals who are more connected to their ethnic identity may 

also be more aware of systemic implications related to ERI (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2004). Based 

on the same assumption, a moderate, positive correlation between both the Colorblind Ideology 

Measure and the Fear of Discussing Race Measure was hypothesized (Rohrbach, 2014; Williams 

& Banerjee, 2021).  

Accountability to Learning about ERI was hypothesized to have a weak, positive 

correlation with the Ethnic Identity Scale because individuals who are more connected to their 

personal ERI are likely to demonstrate accountability to ongoing learning about ERI (Umaña-

Taylor et al., 2004). Accountability to Learning about ERI is aligned with the rejection of a color 

evasive ideology and an openness to discussing race. Therefore, a strong, positive correlation 

between Accountability to Learning about ERI and both the Colorblind Ideology Measure and 

101 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
the Fear of Discussing Race Measure is hypothesized (Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 

2021). 

The Digital Screen Exposure Questionnaire (DESQ; Kaur et al., 2021) was selected as 

the measure to test divergent validity because caregiver views on their toddlers’ use of digital 

screens are expected to be unrelated to all factors of both measures. Thus, I hypothesized that no 

correlation would be found between the DESQ and Personal ERI Awareness, Systemic ERI 

Awareness, nor Accountability to Learning about ERI. 

Correlation Hypotheses for the EERSP Scale 

Table 16 visualizes the hypothesized validity correlations for the ERIAL scale. Given 

that a commitment to Color Conscious Exposure, Affirmation of Blackness, and Discussion of 

Physical Features were all predicted to align with rejecting a color evasive ideology and a fear of 

discussing race, each of these three factors were hypothesized to have a strong, positive 

correlation with both the Colorblind Ideology Measure and the Fear of Discussing Race Measure 

(Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021).  

Table 16 

Hypothesized Validity Correlations for the ERIAL Scale 

Factor 

Personal ERI Awareness 

Systemic ERI Awareness 

Accountability to Learning about ERI 

Comparison Measure 

Hypothesized Correlation 

Ethnic Identity Scale 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Ethnic Identity Scale 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Ethnic Identity Scale 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

+++ 
++ 
++ 
x 

+ 
++ 
++ 
x 

+ 
+++ 
+++ 
x 

x no correlation, + weak positive correlation, ++ moderate positive correlation, +++ strong positive correlation 

102 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
While Cultivation of Empathy and Discussion of Physical Features can be connected to 

constructs of race and ethnicity, the premise of teaching empathy and discussing physical 

features can also be understood more broadly. Therefore, it was hypothesized that both factors 

would have a moderate, positive correlation with the Colorblind Ideology Measure and the Fear 

of Discussing Race Measure (Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021).  

Curation of Window and Mirror Environments was hypothesized to have a moderate, 

positive correlation with the Colorblind Ideology Measure and the Fear of Discussing Race 

Measure because caregiver intentionality around the environments they curate for their children 

are likely related these factors, but the Curation of Window and Mirror Environments can also 

occur despite holding a color evasive ideology and having a fear of discussing race (Rohrbach, 

2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021). For example, caregivers may bring their children to a cultural 

festival celebrating a background that differs from that of their family while still focusing only 

on similarities, or they may purchase a book that features ethnically and racially diverse 

characters while still avoiding direct discussion of ethnic-racial identity with their children.  

As with the ERIAL scale, it was hypothesized that no correlation would be found 

between the DESQ and any of the five EERSP scale factors. Again, this hypothesis assumed that 

the EERSP scale factors would not be related to caregiver views related to their toddlers’ 

exposure to digital screens. 

Table 17 

Hypothesized Validity Correlations for the EERSP Scale 

Factor 

Color Conscious Exposure 

Affirmation of Blackness 

Comparison Measure 

Hypothesized Correlation 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

+++ 
+++ 
x 
++ 
++ 
x 

103 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 17 (cont’d) 

Factor 

Discussion of Physical Features 

Cultivation of Empathy 

Curation of Window and Mirror 
Environments 

Comparison Measure 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Hypothesized Correlation 
++ 
++ 
x 

++ 
++ 
x 

++ 
++ 
x 

x no correlation, + weak positive correlation, ++ moderate positive correlation, +++ strong positive correlation 

Factor Convergent Validity Results for the ERIAL Scale 

Table 18 displays the validity testing results for the ERIAL scale. Consistent with the 

hypothesis, all factors of the ERIAL scale were positively correlated with the Ethnic Identity 

Scale (Umaña-Taylor et al., 2004), however; the strength of the correlations was less than 

anticipated (Personal ERI Awareness: r = .46, p = <.001; Systemic ERI Awareness: r = .17, p 

= .032*; Accountability to Learning about ERI: r = .28, p = <.001). Contrary to the hypothesis, 

Personal ERI Awareness was not correlated with the Colorblind Ideology Measure (Rohrbach, 

2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021; r = .14, p = .079). As predicted, a strong positive correlation 

was found between Systemic ERI Awareness and the Colorblind Ideology Measure (r = .56, p = 

<.001; Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021). Partially consistent with the hypothesis, a 

moderate positive correlation was found between Accountability to Learning about ERI and the 

Colorblind Ideology Measure (r = .35, p = <.001). Consistent with the hypothesis, all three 

ERIAL factors were positively correlated with the Fear of Discussing Race Measure (Rohrbach, 

2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021), but again the correlation strengths were less than expected 

(Personal ERI Awareness: r = .22,  p = .006; Systemic ERI Awareness: r = .29, p = <.001; 

Accountability to Learning about ERI r = .36, p = <.001). 

104 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 18 

Validity Correlation Results for the ERIAL Scale 

Factor 

Personal ERI Awareness 

Systemic ERI Awareness 

Accountability to Learning 
about ERI 

Comparison Measure 

Ethnic Identity Scale 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Ethnic Identity Scale 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Ethnic Identity Scale 
Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Hypothesized 
Correlation 
+++ 
++ 
++ 
x 

Resulting 
Correlation 
      .46** 
      .14 
      .22** 
      -.11 

Hypothesis Status 

Partially Supported 
Not Supported 
Partially Supported 
Fully Supported 

++ 
+++ 
+++ 
x 

+ 
+++ 
+++ 
x 

      .17* 
      .56** 
      .29** 
      .13 

      .28** 
      .35** 
      .36** 
      -.01 

Partially Supported 
Fully Supported 
Partially Supported 
Fully Supported  

Fully Supported 
Partially Supported 
Partially Supported 
Fully Supported 

x no correlation, + weak positive correlation, ++ moderate positive correlation, +++ strong positive correlation 

**p<.001, *p<.05 

Factor Convergent Validity Results for the EERSP Scale 

Table 19 displays the validity testing results for the EERSP. Partially consistent with the 

hypothesis, Color Conscious Exposure, Affirmation of Blackness, and Cultivation of Empathy 

were correlated with the Colorblind Ideology Measure (Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 

2021) with less strength than predicted (Color Conscious Exposure: r = .19, p = .023*; 

Affirmation of Blackness: r = .27, p = <.001; Cultivation of Empathy: r = .28, p = <.001). 

Contrary to the hypothesis, Discussion of Physical Features (r = .05, p = .516) and Cultivation of 

Window and Mirror Environments (r = .14, p = .095) were not correlated with the Colorblind 

Ideology Measure (Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee). Also, partially consistent with the 

hypothesis, Color Conscious Exposure, Discussion of Physical Features, Cultivation of Empathy, 

and Curation of Window and Mirror Environments were correlated with the Fear of Discussing 

Race Measure (Rohrbach, 2014; Williams & Banerjee, 2021) with less strength than predicted 

(Color Conscious Exposure: r = .29, p = <.001; Discussion of Physical Features: r = .23, p 

105 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
= .004**; Cultivation of Empathy: r = .18, p = .031*; Curation of Window and Mirror 

Environments: r = .21, p = .009**). Contrary to the hypothesis, Affirmation of Blackness was 

not correlated with the Colorblind Ideology Measure (r = .14, p = .077; Rohrbach, 2014; 

Williams & Banerjee, 2021). 

Table 19 

Validity Correlation Results for the EERSP Scale 

Factor 

Color Conscious Exposure 

Affirmation of Blackness 

Discussion of Physical Features 

Cultivation of Empathy 

Comparison Measure 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

Hypothesized 
Correlation 
+++ 
+++ 
x 

Resulting 
Correlation 

             .19* 
             .29** 
            -.09 

++ 
++ 
x 

++ 
++ 
x 

++ 
++ 
x 

             .27** 
             .14 
             .02 

             .05 
             .23** 
            -.11 

             .28** 
             .18* 
             .21** 

Hypothesis Status 

Partially Supported 
Partially Supported 
Fully Supported 

Partially Supported 
Partially Supported 
Fully Supported 

Not Supported 
Partially Supported 
Fully Supported 

Partially Supported 
Partially Supported 
Not Supported 

Curation of Window and Mirror 
Environments 

Not Supported 
Partially Supported 
Fully Supported 
x no correlation, + weak positive correlation, ++ moderate positive correlation, +++ strong positive correlation 

Colorblind Ideology 
Fear of Discussing Race 
Digital Screen Exposure 

             .14 
             .21** 
            -.12 

++ 
++ 
x 

**p<.001, *p<.05 

Factor Divergent Validity Results for the ERIAL Scale and the EERSP Scale 

Consistent with the hypothesis, the Digital Screen Exposure Questionnaire (DSEQ; Kaur 

et al., 2021) was uncorrelated with all factors of the ERIAL scale (see Table 20; Personal ERI 

Awareness: r = -.11, p = .16; Systemic ERI Awareness: r = .13, p = .111; Accountability to 

Learning about ERI r = -.01, p = .861). The DSEQ (Kaur et al., 2021) was also uncorrelated with 

Color Conscious Exposure, Affirmation of Blackness, Discussion of Physical Features, and 

Curation of Window and Mirror Environments as anticipated (Color Conscious Exposure: r = 

-.09, p = .253; Affirmation of Blackness: r = .02, p = .821; Discussion of Physical Features: r = 

106 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-.11, p = .177; Curation of Window and Mirror Environments: r = .21, p = .009). However, a 

weak positive correlation was found between Cultivation of Empathy and the DSEQ (see Table 

20; r = .21, p = .009**).  

Discussion 

This study expanded what is known about ethnic-racial socialization (ERS) during the 

racial priming period of the lifespan model (Williams et al., 2020) through the development of 

two new measures and the collection of self-reported data on ERS beliefs and practices among 

caregivers of toddlers. A major strength of this study was the sample population. The inclusion 

of caregivers of toddlers from diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds addresses known gaps in the 

field. The results of this study also further define the construct of Justice-Based Ethnic-Racial 

Socialization (JBERS) by operationalizing a means of assessing caregiver awareness, 

accountability, and action regarding ERS.  

This study identified initial factor structures for both the Ethnic-Racial Identity and 

Learning (ERIAL) Scale and the Early Ethnic-Racial Socialization (EERSP) Scale. Beliefs items 

grouped together mainly as predicted: the predicted Identity factor grouped under Personal ERI 

Awareness, the predicted factors of Black Experience and Racism collapsed into the single factor 

of Systemic ERI Awareness, and the predicted factors of Personal Responsibility and 

Accountability collapsed into the single factor of Accountability to Learning about ERI. 

Although aligning in slightly different ways than expected, the factorial structure strongly 

affirmed the underlying theory.  

The factorial structure of the EERSP Scale grouped differently than expected and 

demonstrated more distinct nuances. Although a Diverse Exposure factor was anticipated, the 

EFA results supported a Color Conscious aspect of Diverse Exposure as well. The items 

107 

 
 
 
 
 
 
predicted to group under the Intentional Teaching factor actually grouped into two factors, 

Discussion of Physical Features and Cultivation of Empathy. It is important to note that the 

Cultivation of Empathy factor was only comprised of two items. This indicates a need to develop 

additional items to measure this factor. The predicted Home Environment items did not load as 

prominently as expected and the Community Environment items organized under the Curation of 

Window and Mirror Environments factor. Affirmation of Blackness was not an anticipated 

factor, but its emergence is a powerful demonstration of how capacity to engage in JBERS must 

include an overt effort to counteract the anti-Black messages that are imbedded in the 

sociopolitical zeitgeist of U.S. society (e.g., Bleich et al., 2019; Combs et al., 2022; Rowell-

Cunsolo et al., 2022). Finally, although the projection that all items might group under one 

factor, Action, was not the result, all items retained under the final the 5-factor solution were 

clearly actionable which is consistent with the underlying theory.    

The factorial structures of both the ERIAL scale and the EERSP scale were further 

supported by the strong reliability scores of each factor. However, most of the convergent 

validity results were minimal when comparing each factor of the ERIAL scale and the EERSP 

scale to previously validated measures, and some of the correlations were not significant. The 

results were also inconsistent with hypothesized correlation strength levels with hypothesized 

correlation strengths consistently higher than the resulting correlation strengths. These results 

suggest a less than expected construct measurement overlap between the new measures and the 

previously validated measures. Now that clear factors have been identified for each measure, 

additional validated measures that more closely reflect the constructs being measured by each 

factor may need to be tested for convergent validity. Divergent validity was demonstrated when 

comparing all factors of the ERIAL scale and all factors of the EERSP except for Cultivation of 

108 

 
 
 
 
 
Empathy. The slight positive correlation with Cultivation of Empathy may suggest that 

caregivers who demonstrate higher capacity to cultivate empathy among toddlers are also more 

likely to consider learning shows for toddlers to be beneficial.  

Limitations and Future Directions 

It is important to interpret the results of the present study in light of several limitations. 

First, initial bot activity and fraudulent responses prompted a change in the survey distribution 

method, shifting from an open, anonymous link to a system where participants were required to 

request an individualized link via email. This adjustment likely created a barrier to participation 

and may have disincentivized some potential respondents. As a result of the higher effort 

required to participate in the survey after additional security measures were implemented, there 

may be an over representation of individuals who were intrinsically motivated to engage in a 

study related to the topic of social justice. Additionally, the length of the survey may have further 

discouraged participation. 

There was also a lack of variation in some of the demographic categories among the 

sample. Most participants were college-educated and economically middle class, which may 

limit the generalizability of the findings. Further, the new measures were tested primarily with 

caregivers of toddlers who were Black, white, or Black-multiracial, and nearly all participants 

self-identified as either Black or white. While consistent with the study design, the inclusion of 

only these ethnic-racial groups also limits the extent to which findings can be generalized across 

all ethnic-racial populations. The survey was also offered exclusively in English, meaning that 

non-English speakers are not represented. 

Finally, survey responses showed a clear trend toward the positive end of the scales. 

Given the focus on topics that some people feel uncomfortable talking and thinking about such 

109 

 
 
 
 
 
as ethnic-racial identity, systemic inequities, and social justice, this trend may reflect an over 

representation in the sample of participants who were motivated to respond based on interest in 

these topics. It could also reflect the influence of social desirability bias (Grimm, 2010).  

Despite these limitations, findings can inform content development for caregiver 

education on how to engage in JBERS for the purpose of advancing policy and practice that 

cultivates inclusive mindsets and disrupts the development of ethnic-racial bias in early 

childhood. Future directions for this research include the development of a scoring scale for both 

the ERIAL scale and the EERSP scale along with an adaptation guide for adjusting the language 

of certain items to reflect additional target populations. For example, the item, “I have children's 

books in my home that include Black people as the main characters of the story”, might be 

adapted to be, “I have children's books in my home that include Asian people as the main 

characters of the story”. Correlation analysis of the data set by demographic factors would also 

help to explore variation between groups. Further examination of convergent and divergent 

validity with the inclusion of additional validated measures would also enhance the 

operationalization of the ERIAL scale and EERSP scale factors. 

Ultimately, the development of the ERIAL scale and the EERSP scale for the 

measurement of caregiver capacity to engage in JBERS offers a path to understanding the types 

of awareness, beliefs, and practices are required to socialize young children in ways that deepen 

their sense of interconnected humanity. Further, these new tools provide practical guidance that 

can inform actionable steps that help both caregivers and the children in their care cultivate ways 

of thinking and acting that dismantle inequitable and dehumanizing social structures. Everyone 

who has the privilege of caring for young children also has the responsibility to guide them in 

ways that will contribute to a more just and liberated future. 

110 

 
 
 
 
 
 
REFERENCES 

Abaied, J. L., & Perry, S. P. (2021). Socialization of racial ideology by White parents. Cultural 

Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 27(3), 431–440. https://doi-
org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/cdp0000454 

Bentley-Edwards, K. L., & Stevenson, H. C. (2016). The multidimensionality of racial/ethnic 
socialization: Scale construction for the cultural and racial experiences of socialization 
(cares). Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25(1), 96–108. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-015-0214-7 

Berk, L. E. (2021). Infants, children, and adolescents, 9th Edition. 

https://www.pearson.com/content/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/us/en/higher-
education/program.html 

Bleich, S. N., Findling, M. G., Casey, L. S., Blendon, R. J., Benson, J. M., SteelFisher, G. K., 
Sayde, J. M., & Miller, C. (2019). Discrimination in the United States: experiences of 
Black Americans. Health Services Research, 54(S2), 1399–1408. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13220 

Bigler, R. S., & Liben, L. S. (2007). Developmental intergroup theory: Explaining and reducing 
children’s social stereotyping and prejudice. Current Directions in Psychological 
Science, 16(3), 162–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00496.x 

Blanchard, S. B., Coard, S. I., Hardin, B. J., & Mereoiu, M. (2019). Use of parental racial 

socialization with African American toddler boys. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 
28(2), 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1274-2 

Bonilla-Silva, E. (2019). Feeling race: theorizing the racial economy of emotions. American 
Sociological Review, 84(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122418816958 

Branch, C. W., & Newcombe, N. (1986). Racial attitude development among young black 

children as a function of parental attitudes: A longitudinal and cross-sectional study. 
Child Development, 57(3), 712–721. 

Browne, M. W. (2001). An overview of analytic rotation in exploratory factor analysis. 

Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 111–150. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3601_05 

Byrd, C. M. (2012). The measurement of racial/ethnic identity in children: A critical review. 

Journal of Black Psychology, 38(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095798410397544 

Castelli, L., & Carraro, L. (2020). No evidence of racial discrimination among toddlers. 

Psicologia Sociale, 15(2), 285–292. https://doi.org/10.1482/96849 

111 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Castelli, L., Carraro, L., & Valmori, A. (2021). Group status rapidly shapes preschoolers’ social 

judgments in minimal group settings. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 206, 
105102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105102 

Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika, 16, 

297-334. 

Combs, B. H. (2022). Bodies out of Place: Theorizing anti-blackness in U.S. society. University 

of Georgia Press. 

Contreras, M. M., Osborne, K. R., Walsdorf, A. A., Anderson, L. A., Caughy, M. O., & Owen, 

M. T. (2021). Holding both truths: Early dynamics of ethnic-racial socialization and 
children’s behavior adjustment in African American and Latinx families. Journal of 
Social Issues, 77(4), 987–1013. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12496 

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among 

five approaches. SAGE Publications. 

Curenton, S. M., Iruka, I. U., Humphries, M., Jensen, B., Durden, T., Rochester, S. E., Sims, J., 
Whittaker, J. V., & Kinzie, M. B. (2020). Validity for the assessing classroom 
sociocultural equity scale (ACSES) in early childhood classrooms. Early Education and 
Development, 31(2), 284–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2019.1611331 

Derman-Sparks, L., & Edwards, J. O. (2020). Anti-bias education for young children and 

ourselves. (2nd edition). The National Association for the Education of Young Children. 

Dunbar, A. S., Leerkes, E. M., Coard, S. I., Supple, A. J., & Calkins, S. (2017). An integrative 
conceptual model of parental racial/ethnic and emotion socialization and links to 
children’s social-emotional development among African American families. Child 
Development Perspectives, 11(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12218 

Efird, C. R., Wilkins, C. L., & Versey, H. S. (2024). Whiteness hurts society: How whiteness 

shapes mental, physical, and social health outcomes. Journal of Social Issues, 80(1), 53–
79. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12598 

Elenbaas, L., & Killen, M. (2016). Age-related changes in children’s associations of economic 

resources and race. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00884 

Fassbender, I., Teubert, M., & Lohaus, A. (2016). The development of preferences for own-race 
versus other-race faces in 3-, 6- and 9-month-old Caucasian infants. European Journal of 
Developmental Psychology, 13(1), 152–165. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2015.1073585 

Ferman, B. (2020). The role of social justice frameworks in an era of neoliberalism: Lessons 

from youth activism. Journal of Urban Affairs, 43(3), 436–448. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2020.1734012 

112 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Field, A. (2024). Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics. SAGE Publications. 

Freire, P. (1978). Pedagogy of the Oppressed*. In Toward a Sociology of Education. Routledge. 

García Coll, C., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., & Vázquez 
García, H. (1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in 
minority children. Child Development, 67(5), 1891–1914. 

Gignac, G. E., & Szodorai, E. T. (2016). Effect size guidelines for individual differences 

researchers. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74–78. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.069 

Gillen-O’Neel, C., Huynh, V. W., Hazelbaker, T., & Harrison, A. (2022). From kindness and 

diversity to justice and action: White parents’ ethnic–racial socialization goals. Journal of 
Family Issues, 43(4), 944–973. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X21996392 

Gilliam, W. (2005). Prekindergarteners left behind: Expulsion rates in state prekindergarten 

systems. 

Grimm, P. (2010). Social Desirability Bias. In Wiley International Encyclopedia of Marketing. 
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444316568.wiem02057 

Hagerman, M. A. (2014). White families and race: Colour-blind and colour-conscious 

approaches to white racial socialization. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37(14), 2598–2614. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2013.848289 

Harris, L., & Cossins, D. (2020). The roots of racism. New Scientist, 247(3297), 43–45. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0262-4079(20)31506-2 

Hayden, A. N. (2012). The role of racial information in infant face processing (1266165583; 

2012-99200-012; Issue AAI3491662).  

Hazelbaker, T., Brown, C. S., Nenadal, L., & Mistry, R. (2021). Raising white resisters: 
Studying the development of anti-racist white children and youth. OSF. 
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ej9a5 

Hazelbaker, T., Brown, C. S., Nenadal, L., & Mistry, R. S. (2022). Fostering anti-racism in white 

children and youth: Development within contexts. American Psychologist. https://doi-
org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1037/amp0000948 

Heron-Delaney, M., Damon, F., Quinn, P. C., Meary, D., Xiao, N. G., Lee, K., & Pascalis, O. 

(2017). An adult face bias in infants that is modulated by face race. International Journal 
of Behavioral Development, 41(5), 581–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025416651735 

113 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: 
Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A 
Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 

Hughes, D., & Chen, L. (1997). When and what parents tell children about race: An examination 

of race-related socialization among African American families. Applied Developmental 
Science, 1(4), 200–214. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0104_4 

Hughes, D., & Chen, L. (1999). Parents' race-related messages to children: A developmental 

perspective. In C. Tamis-Lemonda, & L. Balter (Eds.), Child psychology: A handbook of 
contemporary issues. New York University Press. 

Hughes, D., Rodriguez, J., Smith, E. P., Johnson, D. J., Stevenson, H. C., & Spicer, P. (2006). 

Parents’ ethnic-racial socialization practices: A review of research and directions for 
future study. Developmental Psychology, 42(5), 747–770. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-
1649.42.5.747 

Hughes, J. M., Bigler, R. S., & Levy, S. R. (2007). Consequences of learning about historical 

racism among European American and African American children. Child Development, 
78(6), 1689–1705. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01096.x 

Hughes, D., Cox, B., & Das, S. (2023). Growing up, learning race: An integration of research on 

cognitive mechanisms and socialization in context. Annual Review of Developmental 
Psychology, 5(Volume 5, 2023), 137–167. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-devpsych-
120321-015718 

Iruka, I., Curenton, S., Durden, T., & Escayg, K.-A. (2020). Don’t look away: Embracing anti-
bias classrooms. https://www.kaplanco.com/product/33461/dont-look-away-embracing-
anti-bias-classrooms?c=16%7CTR1026 

Jemal, A., & Bussey, S.R., (2022). Liberatory education: We are the ones we’ve been waiting 

for. In M. Sykes, & K. Ostendorf. Child care justice: Transforming the system of care for 
young children. (pp. 20-47) Teachers College Press. 

Katz, P. A. (2003). Racists or tolerant multiculturalists? How do they begin? 

https://doi=10.1037%2F0003-066X.58.11.897b 

Kaur, N., Gupta, M., Kiran, T., Malhi, P., & Grover, S. (2021). Development and evaluation of 

the digital-screen exposure questionnaire (DSEQ) for young children. PLOS ONE, 16(6), 
e0253313. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253313 

Kelly, D., Quinn, P., Slater, A., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, M., Ge, L., & Pascalis, O. (2005). 

Three-month-olds, but not newborns, prefer own-race faces. Developmental Science, 
8(6), F31–F36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.0434a.x 

Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to be an antiracist (First Edition). One World. 

114 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Kinzler, K. D., & Spelke, E. S. (2011). Do infants show social preferences for people differing in 

race? Cognition, 119(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.019 

Krasotkina, A., Goetz, A., Hoehle, B., & Schwarzer, G. (2018). Perceptual narrowing in speech 
and face recognition: evidence for intra-individual cross-domain relations. Frontiers In 
Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01711 

Mitsch, Maryssa Kucskar, et al. "Social emotional development and early childhood mental 

health: special education and social work collaboration." Handbook of research on 
interdisciplinary preparation for equitable special education, edited by Dena D. Slanda 
and Lindsey Pike, IGI Global, 2023, pp. 468-494. https://doi-
org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.4018/978-1-6684-6438-0.ch023 

Liu, S., Xiao, W. S., Xiao, N. G., Quinn, P. C., Zhang, Y., Chen, H., Ge, L., Pascalis, O., & Lee, 
K. (2015). Development of visual preference for own- versus other-race faces in infancy. 
Developmental Psychology, 51(4), 500–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038835 

Malat, J., Mayorga-Gallo, S., & Williams, D. R. (2018). The effects of whiteness on the health of 

whites in the USA. Social Science & Medicine, 199, 148–156.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.06.034 

Mandalaywala, T. M., Tai, C., & Rhodes, M. (2020). Children’s use of race and gender as cues 

to social status. PLOS ONE, 15(6), e0234398.  
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0234398 

Marcelo, A. K., & Yates, T. M. (2018). Young children’s ethnic–racial identity moderates the 

impact of early discrimination experiences on child behavior problems. Cultural    
Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 25(2), 253–265.    
https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000220 

McConaughy, S. H., & Achenbach, T. M. (2004). Manual for the test observation form for ages 

2-18. ASEBA. 

Meltzoff, A., Gilliam, W.S. (2024). Young children & implicit racial biases. Daedalus 153 (1): 

65–83. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_02049 

Mesman, J., Bruijn, Y. de, Veen, D. van, Pektas, F., & Emmen, R. A. G. (2022). Maternal color‐
consciousness is related to more positive and less negative attitudes toward ethnic‐racial 
outgroups in children in White Dutch families. Child Development, 93(3), 668. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13784 

Murray, C. B., & Mandara, J. (2002). Racial identity development in African American children: 
Cognitive and experiential antecedents. In Black children: Social, educational, and 
parental environments, 2nd ed (pp. 73–96). Sage Publications, Inc. 

115 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Murry, V. M., Berkel, C., Brody, G. H., Gibbons, M., & Gibbons, F. X. (2007). The strong 

African American families program: Longitudinal pathways to sexual risk reduction. 
Journal of Adolescent Health, 41(4), 333–342. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.04.003 

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2017). Mplus: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables: 

User's Guide (Version 8). Los Angeles, CA: Authors. 

Njoroge, W., Benton, T., Lewis, M. L., & Njoroge, N. M. (2009). What are infants learning 
about race? A look at a sample of infants from multiple racial groups. Infant Mental 
Health Journal, 30(5), 549–567. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20228 

Pahlke, E., Bigler, R. S., & Suizzo, M. A. (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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
8624.2012.01770.x 

Perszyk, D. R., Lei, R. F., Bodenhausen, G. V., Richeson, J. A., & Waxman, S. R. (2019). Bias 
at the intersection of race and gender: Evidence from preschool-aged children. 
Developmental Science, 22(3), e12788. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12788 

Quintana, S. M. (1998). Children’s developmental understanding of ethnicity and race. Applied 

& Preventive Psychology, 7(1), 27–45. 
http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1016/S0962-1849(98)80020-6 

Repacholi, B. M., & Gopnik, A. (1997). Early reasoning about desires: Evidence from 14- and 
18-month-olds. Developmental Psychology, 33(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-
1649.33.1.12 

Rivas-Drake, D., Seaton, E. K., Markstrom, C., Quintana, S., Syed, M., Lee, R. M., Schwartz, S. 

J., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., French, S., Yip, T., & Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st 
Century Study Group. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity in adolescence: Implications for 
psychosocial, academic, and health outcomes. Child Development, 85(1), 40–57. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12200 

Rochat, P. (2003). Five levels of self-awareness as they unfold early in life. Consciousness and 

Cognition, 12(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8100(03)00081-3 

Rochat, P., & Striano, T. (2000). Perceived self in infancy. Infant Behavior and Development, 

23(3–4), 513–530. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-6383(01)00055-8 

Rogers, L. O., Kiang, L., White, L., Calzada, E. J., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Byrd, C., Williams, C. 

D., Marks, A., & Whitesell, N. (2020). Persistent concerns: Questions for research on 
ethnic-racial identity development. Research in Human Development, 17(2–3), 130–153. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2020.1831881 

116 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rohrbach, J.M. (2014) Maternal behavior during cross-race interactions and children’s racial 

attitudes: The nonverbal transmission of prejudice (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from 
UT Electronic Theses and Dissertation. 

Rowell-Cunsolo, T. L., Bellerose, M., & Haile, R. (2022). Hazards of anti-Blackness in the 

United States. International Journal of Social Welfare, 31(4), 520–528. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsw.12547 

Serrano-Villar, M., & Calzada, E. J. (2016). Ethnic identity: Evidence of protective effects for 

young, Latino children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 42, 21–30. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2015.11.002 

Spencer, M. B., 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. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579497001454 

Scott, K. E., Huth, N., Fukuda, E., Shutts, K., & Devine, P. G. (2024). Empowering behaviors to 

address race with kids (EmBARK): A racial socialization program for white families. 
Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 94, 101696.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2024.101696 

Swanson, D. P., Cunningham, M., Youngblood, J., & Spencer, M. B. (2009). Racial identity 

development during childhood. Handbook of African American psychology, 269-281. 

Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Quintana, S. M., Lee, R. M., Cross Jr., W. E., Rivas-Drake, D., Schwartz, 

S. J., Syed, M., Yip, T., Seaton, E., & Ethnic and Racial Identity in the 21st Century 
Study Group. (2014). Ethnic and racial identity during adolescence and into young 
adulthood: An integrated conceptualization. Child Development, 85(1), 21–39. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12196 

Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Yazedjian, A., & Bámaca-Gómez, M. (2004). Developing the ethnic 
identity scale using Eriksonian and social identity perspectives. Identity, 4(1), 9–38. 
https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532706XID0401_2 

Waxman, S. R. (2021). Racial awareness and bias begin early: Developmental entry points, 

challenges, and a call to action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(5), 893–902. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211026968 

White-Johnson, R. L., Ford, K. R., & Sellers, R. M. (2010). Parental racial socialization profiles: 
Association with demographic factors, racial discrimination, childhood socialization, and 
racial identity. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(2), 237–247. 
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016111 

Wilkerson, I. (2020). Caste: The origins of our discontents. Random House Publishing Group. 

117 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Williams, A. D., & Banerjee, M. (2021). Ethnic-racial socialization among Black, Latinx, and 
White parents of elementary school-age children. Journal of Social Issues, 77(4), 1037–
1062. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12493 

Williams, C. D., Byrd, C. M., Quintana, S. M., Anicama, C., Kiang, L., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., 

Calzada, E. J., Pabón Gautier, M., Ejesi, K., Tuitt, N. R., Martinez-Fuentes, S., White, L., 
Marks, A., Rogers, L. O., & Whitesell, N. (2020). A lifespan model of ethnic-racial 
identity. Research in Human Development, 17(2–3), 99–129. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2020.1831882 

Woolverton, G. A., & Marks, A. K. (2022). An integrative model for the development of anti-
racist behavior in white adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 39(4), 917-949. 
https://doi-org.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/10.1177/07435584221091492 

Zubler, J. M., Wiggins, L. D., Macias, M. M., Whitaker, T. M., Shaw, J. S., Squires, J. K., Pajek, 

J. A., Wolf, R. B., Slaughter, K. S., Broughton, A. S., Gerndt, K. L., Mlodoch, B. J., & 
Lipkin, P. H. (2022). Evidence-informed milestones for developmental surveillance tools. 
Pediatrics, 149(3), e2021052138. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2021-052138 

Zucker, J. K., & Patterson, M. M. (2018). Racial socialization practices among white American 

parents: Relations to racial attitudes, racial identity, and school diversity. Journal of 
Family Issues, 39(16), 3903–3930. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X18800766 

118 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX A: ITEM ADAPTATION 

Table 20 

Item Adaptation 

Measure 

Original Items 

Adapted Items 

American society is fair 
toward Black people. 

American society treats Black 
people fairly.  

Adapted Item Scale 
Placement 
ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 

Parent 
Experiences of 
Racial 
Socialization 
(PERS) 
Stevenson, 
1999, 2002 

Cultural and 
Racial 
Experiences of 
Socialization 
(CARES) 
Edwards and 
Stevenson, 2015 

All races are equal. 

All ethnic and racial groups are 
treated the same in American 
society. 
All ethnic and racial groups 
should have equal value in 
American society. 

ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 
ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 

Too much talk about racism 
will keep you from 
reaching your goals. 

Talking too much about racism 
is not helpful. 

Blacks don't always have 
the same opportunities as 
Whites. 

Black people and White people 
don't always have the same 
opportunities in American 
society. 

ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 

ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 

It is important to remember 
the experience of Black 
slavery. 

It is important to remember the 
experience of the impact of the 
enslavement of Black people. 

ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 

Schools should be required 
to teach all children about 
Black history.  

Original item maintained. 

Racism is not as bad today 
as it used to be. 

Original item maintained. 

ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 

ERIAL 
Systemic Awareness 
Subscale 

Cultural 
Socialization 
Behaviors 
Measure Derlan 
et al., 2016 

I read books to my child in 
which people from our 
ethnic/cultural background 
are represented. 

I read books to my child in 
which people from my child's 
ethnic-racial background are 
represented. 

EERSP 
Diverse Exposure Subscale 

My home is decorated with 
things that reflect our 
ethnic/cultural background. 

My home is decorated with 
things that reflect my child's 
ethnic-racial background. 

EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

119 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 20 (cont’d) 

Measure 

Original Items 

Adapted Items 

Emergence of 
Ethnic-Racial 
Socialization  

Taken your child to 
places/events that reflect 
his/her racial or ethnic 
heritage 

I take my child to places/events 
that reflect my child's ethnic-
racial heritage. 

Adapted Item Scale 
Placement 
EERSP 
Diverse Exposure Subscale 

Contreras et al., 
2022 

Afrocentric 
Home 
Environment  
Caughy et al., 
2022 

Celebrated cultural 
holidays of your 
ethnic/racial group 

Done or said other things to 
encourage your child to 
learn about the 
history/traditions of your 
ethnic/racial group 

Child has African 
American toy: this item is 
parallel to HOME items 1-6 
(items about toys to learn 
various things in the 
learning simulation 
subscale). 

I take my child to places/events 
that reflect the ethnic-racial 
heritage of other groups. 

EERSP 
Diverse Exposure Subscale 

I include my child in 
celebrations and cultural 
holidays of my child's ethnic-
racial group. 

I talk to my child about the 
celebrations and cultural 
holidays of other ethnic-racial 
groups. 

EERSP 
Diverse Exposure Subscale 

EERSP 
Diverse Exposure Subscale 

I have dolls or toy people with 
light brown skin in my home for 
my child to play with. 

EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

I have dolls or toy people with 
dark brown skin in my home for 
my child to play with. 
I have dolls or toy people with 
white/very light skin in my 
home for my child to play with. 

EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 
EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

African American 
children's books (n = 3): 
This item is parallel to 
HOME item 7 (10 
children's books) in the 
learning simulation 
subscale. 

I have children's books in my 
home that include images of 
Black and Brown people.  

EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

I have children's books in my 
home that include Black people 
as the main characters of the 
story.  

EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

120 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 20 (cont’d) 

Measure 

Original Items 

Adapted Items 

I have adult books in my home 
that include Black people as the 
main character of the story. 

Ten African American 
books: (adult and child 
books total 10 or more): 
This item is parallel to  
HOME item 8 (10 books 
visible in the home) and is 
intended in general to 
identify whether the family 
values having books in 
general and about African 
Americans specifically. 

Adapted Item Scale 
Placement 
EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

I have adult books in my home 
that are written by Black 
authors. 

EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

I intentionally learn about race 
and racism through educational 
media (e.g. books, social media, 
movies, television shows).  

I have photographs that include 
images of family and friends 
from diverse ethnic-racial 
backgrounds in my home that 
my child can see. 

ERIAL 
Accountability Subscale 

EERSP 
Home Environment 
Subscale 

Pictures of family 
members: this item reflects 
several Afrocentric 
dimensions including 
interpersonal orientation 
(connection to people over 
objects, preference for 
personal rather than the 
material), "communalism" 
(value of cooperation and 
collectivism over 
competition and 
individualism), and 
"interconnectedness" 
(connecting the past, 
present, and future). 

Told me to be proud of the 
way I look (e.g., skin color, 
hair color/type) 

I talk to my child about the way 
they look (e.g., skin color, hair 
color/texture) in positive ways. 

EERSP 
Intentional Teaching 
Subscale 

Multiracial 
Youth 
Socialization 
Scale 
Atkin et. al, 
2022 

121 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX B: UPDATED RECRUITMENT FLYER 

Figure 8 

Updated Recruitment Flyer 

122 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX C: DEMOGRAPHIC ITEMS 

1.  What is your race/ethnicity? (Check All That Apply),  

a.  Black/African American 
b.  Asian 
c.  American Indian 
d.  Alaska Native 
e.  Middle Eastern 
f.  North African 
g.  Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 
h.  White/Euro-American 
i.  Hispanic/Latino/é 
j.  Another Term (text option) 

2.  What term do you use to describe your race/ethnicity? 

(text option) 

3.  What is your age? 
(text option) 

4.  What is your highest level of education? 
a.  Less than High School  
b.  High School/GED 
c.  Some College (no degree) 
d.  Associate degree (e.g. AA, AS) 
e.  Bachelor’s degree (e.g. BA, BS) 
f.  Master’s degree (e.g. MA, MS, MEd) 
g.  Professional degree (e.g. MD, DDS, DVM) 
h.  Doctorate (e.g. PhD, EdD) 

5.  What is your annual household income?  

6.  Number of children in the household,  

a.  One 
b.  Two 
c.  Three 
d.  Four or more 

123 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Some of the questions on this survey will be about your toddler (12 to 36 months old). If you 
have more than one toddler, decide which one you will think of when answering the questions 
and think of that same child for all of your responses. What is the first name of your toddler? 
(text option) 

7.  What is your relationship to [child's name]? 

a.  Parent 
b.  Grandparent 
c.  Another Term (text option) 

8.  What is [child]'s sex/gender? 

a.  Girl 
b.  Boy 
c.  Non-Binary 
d.  Another Term (text option) 

9.  What is [child]'s birthdate?  

(date option) 

10. What is your child's race/ethnicity? (Check All That Apply)  

a.  Black/African American 
b.  Asian 
c.  American Indian 
d.  Alaska Native 
e.  Middle Eastern 
f.  North African 
g.  Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 
h.  White/Euro-American 
i.  Hispanic/Latino/é 
j.  Another Term (text option) 

11. What term do you use to describe your child's race/ethnicity? 

(text option) 

12. Is there a second term that you use to describe your child's race/ethnicity?  

(text option) 

13. What is the primary language you use when speaking with [Child] at home? 

(text option) 

124 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
14. Do you speak any other languages at home with [Child]? 

(text option) 

15. Is your child adopted? 

a.  Yes 
b.  No 

16. Is your child currently in your care as a foster child? 

a.  Yes 
b.  No 

17. What is your zip code? 

(text option) 

125 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX D: ETHNIC-RACIAL IDENTITY AWARENESS AND LEARNING (ERIAL) 

SCALE  

1.  My race is an important aspect of my personal identity.  

2.  My ethnicity is an important aspect of my personal identity.  

3.  I believe that it is important for my toddler to learn about the ethnic background[s] of our 

family.  

4.  I believe that it is important for my toddler to know about the history of their own racial 

background[s].  

5.  American society treats Black people fairly.  

6.  Schools should be required to teach all children about Black history.  

7.  Black people and White people don't always have the same opportunities in American 

society.  

8.  In the U.S., race and ethnicity impact a person's access to social systems such as 

education, employment, housing, health care, and public safety.  

9.  Laws and policies in the United States are applied differently based on people's ethnic-

racial identity.  

10. All ethnic and racial groups are treated the same in American society.  

11. Talking a lot about racism is not helpful.  

12. I intentionally learn about race and racism through educational media (e.g., books, social 

media, movies, television shows).  

13. I learn about the impact of racism by listening to the stories of other people in my life 

who come from diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds.  

14. It is important for me to utilize my identity advantages to advocate for others who don't 

have the same advantages.  

15. I actively seek opportunities to enhance my own understanding of racial justice.  

16. Helping my toddler understand the impact of ethnic-racial identity in the United States is 

a significant priority for me.  

17. I believe that it is important for my toddler to learn about people who have an ethnic-
racial background that is different from my toddler's ethnic-racial background. 

126 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX E: EARLY ETHNIC-RACIAL SOCIALIZATION PRACTICES (EERSP) SCALE  

1.  I read books to my toddler in which people from my toddler's ethnic-racial background[s] 

are represented.  

2.  I take my toddler to places/events that reflect my toddler's ethnic-racial heritage (e.g., 

museums, community events, restaurants, grocery stores).  

3.  I read books to my toddler that provide positive representation of Black/African 

American people.  

4.  I include my toddler in cultural celebrations and holidays of my toddler's ethnic-racial 

group[s].  

5.  I take my toddler to places/events that reflect the ethnic-racial heritage of other groups 

(e.g., museums, community events, restaurants, grocery stores).  

6.  I purposefully provide my toddler with opportunities to interact with individuals from 

diverse ethnic-racial backgrounds.   

7.  I talk to my toddler about the celebrations and cultural holidays of other ethnic-racial 

groups.  

8.  I talk to my toddler about the way people from other ethnic-racial backgrounds look in 

positive ways (e.g., skin color, hair color/texture).  

9.  I help my toddler recognize others' feelings and emotions (e.g., During a peer interaction, 
I might say, "He's crying, it looks like he's sad." While reading a book, I might say, "She 
has a big smile, she looks happy.")  

10. When discussing people and images of people with my toddler, I describe the similarities 

in physical features such as skin color, hair texture, and eye shape.  

11. When discussing people and images of people with my toddler, I draw attention to and 

discuss the differences in physical features such as skin color, hair texture, and eye shape.  

12. I am intentional about helping my toddler recognize the feelings and emotions of others 
who have an ethnic-racial background that is different from my toddler. (e.g., During a 
peer interaction, I might say, "He's crying, it looks like he's sad." While reading a book, I 
might say, "She has a big smile, she looks happy.")  

13. I have dolls or toy people with dark brown skin in my home for my toddler to play with.  

14. I have children's books in my home that include Black people as the main characters of 

the story.  

127 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
15. I have children's books in my home that include images of Black and Brown people.  

16. I have adult books in my home that are written by Black authors.  

17. I have adult books in my home that include Black people as the main character of the 

story.  

18. I intentionally choose to have my toddler in childcare and school settings that are 

ethnically and racially diverse.  

19. I intentionally choose to live in a neighborhood where my toddler can regularly see and 

interact with other people who look like my toddler.  

20. I intentionally choose to live in a neighborhood that has significant ethnic-racial 

diversity.  

21. I intentionally choose to have my toddler in childcare and school settings where my 

toddler can be around other people who look like my toddler. 

128 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX F: ETHNIC IDENTITY SCALE  

Ethnic Identity Scale (Umaña-Taylor, Yazedjian, & Bámaca-Gómez, 2004) 

The U.S. is made up of people of various ethnicities. Ethnicity refers to cultural traditions, 

beliefs, and behaviors that are passed down through generations. Some examples of the 

ethnicities that people may identify with are Mexican, Cuban, Nicaraguan, Chinese, Taiwanese, 

Filipino, Jamaican, African American, Haitian, Italian, Irish, and German. In addition, some 

people may identify with more than one ethnicity. When you are answering the following 

questions, we’d like you to think about what YOU consider your ethnicity to be. 

Please write what you consider to be your ethnicity here ____________________________ and 

refer to this ethnicity as you answer the questions below.  

Table 21 

Ethnic Identity Scale 

Items 

Does not 
describe 
me at all 

Describes 
me a little 

Describes 
me well 

Describes 
me very 
well 

1. My feelings about my ethnicity are mostly negative. 
[RC] 

2. I have not participated in any activities that would teach 
me about my ethnicity. [RC] 

3. I am clear about what my ethnicity means to me. 

4. I have experienced things that reflect my ethnicity, such 
as eating food, listening to music, and watching movies. 

5. I have attended events that have helped me learn more 
about my ethnicity 

6. I have read books/magazines/newspapers or other 
materials that have taught me about my ethnicity. 

7. I feel negatively about my ethnicity. [RC] 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

129 

 
 
 
 
 
  
Table 21 (cont’d) 

Items 

Does not 
describe 
me at all 

Describes 
me a little 

Describes 
me well 

Describes 
me very 
well 

8. I have participated in activities that have exposed me to 
my ethnicity 

9. I wish I were of a different ethnicity [RC] 

10. I am not happy with my ethnicity. [RC] 

11. I have learned about my ethnicity by doing things such 
as reading (books, magazines, newspapers), searching the 
internet, or keeping up with current events. 

12. I understand how I feel about my ethnicity. 

13. If I could choose, I would prefer to be of a different 
ethnicity. [RC] 

14. I know what my ethnicity means to me. 

15. I have participated in activities that have taught me 
about my ethnicity. 

16. I dislike my ethnicity. [RC] 

17. I have a clear sense of what my ethnicity means to me. 

RC = Reverse Coded 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

130 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
APPENDIX G: COLORBLIND IDEOLOGY MEASURE  

Questions developed for a dissertation (Rohrbach, 2014), and used by Williams & Banerjee, 

2021. 

Response options were (1) very strongly disagree, (2) strongly disagree, (3) disagree, (4) agree, 

(5) strongly agree, (6) very strongly agree. 

1.  I think it’s best to avoid mentioning someone’s race or ethnicity when talking about or 

describing someone. [RC] 

2.  I try to downplay differences between racial or ethnic groups. [RC] 

3.  I am afraid if I mention race or ethnicity, people will think I am prejudiced. 

4.  I like to think that I don’t see race or ethnicity. [RC] 

5.  Every person has a “fair shot” at life, no matter their race or ethnicity. [RC] 

6.  Racism doesn’t exist in our society anymore. [RC] 

RC = Reverse Coded 

131 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX H: FEAR OF DISCUSSING RACE MEASURE  

Questions developed for a dissertation (Rohrbach, 2014), and used by Williams & Banerjee, 

2021. 

Response options were (1) very strongly disagree, (2) strongly disagree, (3) disagree, (4) agree, 

(5) strongly agree, (6) very strongly agree. 

1.  I fear that talking about race with my child will draw his or her attention to race 

unnecessarily. [RC] 

2.  I fear that talking about race with my child will lead him or her to be racially biased. 

[RC] 

3.  I don’t know what my child understands about race at his or her age. [RC] 

4.  I am nervous about talking about race with my child. [RC] 

5.  I don’t know what to say about race that will lead my child to be unbiased. [RC] 

RC = Reverse Coded 

132 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
APPENDIX I: PREJUDICE CONCERNS MEASURE  

Questions developed for a dissertation (Rohrbach, 2014), and used by Williams & Banerjee, 

2021. 

Response options were (1) very strongly disagree, (2) strongly disagree, (3) disagree, (4) agree, 

(5) strongly agree, (6) very strongly agree. 

Concerns that Children Will be Discriminated Against 

1.  When my child talks to someone of a different race or ethnicity, I worry that he/she 

might be treated in a prejudiced way. 

2.  When I see someone of a different race or ethnicity, I worry that they will act prejudiced 

towards my child.  

Concerns that Children will Discriminate Against Others 

1.  I am worried that my child might think prejudiced thoughts around people of different 

races or ethnicities. 

2.  When my child thinks about talking to someone of a different race or ethnicity, I am 

worried that he/she might have inappropriate thoughts or feelings.  

3.  When my child thinks about talking to someone of a different race or ethnicity, I am 
worried that my child might say something that will make him/her look prejudiced. 

4.  I am concerned that something my child does or says when talking to someone of a 

different race or ethnicity might be labeled prejudice. 

133 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX J: DIGITAL-SCREEN EXPOSURE QUESTIONNAIRE (DSEQ) 

FOR YOUNG CHILDREN 

Domain 2: Screen time exposure and home media environment 

1.  What is the frequency of watching television in a typical week? 

2.  Duration of watching television on a typical working day? 

3.  Duration of watching television on a typical holiday? 

4.  Does the child watch television supervision frequency by an adult? 

5.  What is the frequency of using smartphone in a typical week? 

6.  Duration of using smartphone on a typical working day? 

7.  Duration of using smartphone on a typical holiday? 

8.  Does the child use smartphone supervision frequency by an adult? 

9.  What is the frequency of watching laptop/computer in a typical week? 

10. Duration of watching laptop/computer on a typical working day? 

11. Duration of watching laptop/computer on a typical holiday? 

12. Does the child watch laptop/computer supervision frequency by an adult? 

13. Do you have any rules regarding when, where, what & how to watch digital screen? 

14. Average duration of screen time per day of the caretaker 

Domain 3: Level of physical activity 

15. Average duration of outside play per day on working/school days 

16. Average duration on holidays of outside play per day 

Domain 4: Media behaviors of the child 

17. The child uses digital media gadgets for completing homework assignments online 

18. The child uses video calling applications to talk to the family/friends 

19. The child uses digital media gadgets for learning poems, rhymes, alphabets etc. 

134 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
20. The child uses digital media gadgets to learn math’s, numbers, tables 

21. The child uses digital media gadgets to recognize shapes/sounds/colors 

22. The child uses digital media gadgets to learn various sciences online 

23. The child uses digital media gadgets to learn to draw/write 

24. The child plays video games on digital media gadgets 

25. The child uses digital media gadgets to watch stories 

26. The child uses digital media gadgets to watch adult programs (soap opera, news, sports, 

movies etc.) on media screens online 

27. The child uses digital media gadgets to learn letters, words, vocabulary, language online 

28. Digital media gadgets to watch random things for enjoyment (music, advertisements, 

click photos etc.) 

135 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CHAPTER 4: INTEGRATED DISCUSSION 

Introduction 

Inspired by the lifespan model of ethnic-racial identity, two studies were designed to 

deepen our understanding of the initial phase of the lifespan model: ethnic-racial priming. Ethnic 

racial priming “...may prompt initial awareness of ethnicity/race that becomes differentiated 

across childhood and through adulthood” (Williams et al., 2020, p. 120). Study 1 used a scoping 

review to investigate the current state of the literature on the socio-cognitive capacity of infants 

and toddlers in connection with ethnicity and race. Study 2 sought to advance measurement 

options to investigate ways in which caregivers contribute socialization factors by examining 

their beliefs and practices. Taken together, the two studies serve to test the hypotheses embedded 

within the Reciprocal Ethnic-Racial Identity Development (RERID) model (see Figure 9). 

Learnings from both studies are applied to the RERID model resulting in the updated Reciprocal 

Healthy Ethnic-Racial Identify Development (RHERID) model. 

Original REIRD Model 

The lifespan model of ethnic-racial identity demonstrates the interconnectedness and 

overlap of ERI dimensions over time and across developmental periods (Williams et al., 2020). 

The lifespan model also serves as an invitation for ERI scholars to further operationalize ERI 

development within each developmental period through advances in measurement and 

examination of influences. In response, the RERID model was developed from an integrated 

theoretical framework (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, 1979; García Coll et al., 1996; Piaget et al., 1971; 

Spencer et al., 1997; Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017, Vygotsky, 1978) to organize ideas on how 

infants and toddlers begin to develop ERI within the ethnic-racial priming phase of the lifespan 

model.  

136 

 
 
 
 
 
Central to the RERID model is the dyadic interaction between child and caregiver. The 

caregiver is positioned within the model as a socializing agent and the child is positioned as a 

socialization recipient. The RERID model hypothesizes that the socio-cognitive capacity of 

infants and toddlers interacts with the socialization factors brought by their caregivers resulting 

in ERI development outcomes. The RERID model further suggests that the caregiver experiences 

further ERI development throughout the process; thus, the socializing agent is also a secondary 

socialization recipient, making the process dynamic and reciprocal. Cultural contexts and 

individual factors are also represented in the model as components that influence ERI 

developmental outcomes. 

Study 1 Findings 

Summary of Study Findings 

Findings from Study 1 affirmed the saliency of ethnicity and race for infants and toddlers 

with 92% of studies included in the scoping review (N = 168) demonstrating the ability of 

infants and toddlers to differentiate others based on phenotypic differences in visual and auditory 

features (e.g., Bar-Haim et al., 2006; Howard et al., 2015). Study 1 also provided evidence that 

in-group familiarity (e.g., ethnicity, race, language, culture) emerges during infancy and 

continues to develop throughout toddlerhood (e.g., Fassbender et al., 2016, Hayden et al., 2007). 

Natural out-group curiosity among older infants was also evident in Study 1 results (e.g., Katz & 

Kofkin, 1997; Liu et al., 2015), as was the tendency of infants and toddlers to view out-group 

members as less reliable sources when it comes to providing information or giving directions 

(e.g., Buttelmann, 2013; Pickron et al., 2017). Further, the impact of perceptual narrowing was 

elevated in Study 1 with results showing a decrease in infant ability to differentiate other-race 

137 

 
 
 
 
 
faces over time in the absence of exposure (e.g., Balas et al., 2011; Kelly et al., 2007; Sugden & 

Marquis et al., 2017). 

Figure 9  

The Reciprocal Ethnic-Racial Identity Development Model 

While only two of the 168 included studies explored the impact of intentional exposure to 

other-race faces as an intervention, both demonstrated promising results in disruption of 

perceptual narrowing effects (Anzures et al., 2012; Heron-Delaney et al., 2011). Conjointly, the 

findings from Study 1 provide evidence that the first three years of life are a unique period in 

which intentional ERS may have particularly strong effects on subsequent healthy ERI. 

Unfortunately, Study 1 also revealed a substantial lack of research about how caregivers engage 

in ERS with infants and toddlers or how ERS with infants and toddlers might influence variation 

in children’s subsequent behaviors and ERI outcomes. 

138 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Study 2 Findings 

Study 2 outlined a systemic process of new measure development in response to the 

research gaps illuminated in Study 1. Items from existing measures were adapted for relevancy 

to the population, caregivers of infants and toddlers, and novel items were created in alignment 

with applicable theoretical frameworks. The process resulted in the development of two new 

measures intended to measure ERI beliefs (Ethnic-Racial Identity Awareness and Learning 

Scale) and ERS practices (Early Ethnic-Racial Socialization Practices Scale) among caregivers 

of infants and toddlers. Together, the ERIAL scale and the EERSP scale surveys contain the 

subcomponents of justice-based ethnic-racial socialization (JBERS), and the scoring of both 

measures indicates the level of capacity caregivers of infants and toddlers possess to engage in 

JBERS. 

Study 2 used exploratory factor analysis to examine the factorial structure of the two new 

measures. The consideration of data analysis results, theoretical alignment and factorial structure 

interpretability were used to identify the final factor solutions for each measure. Evidence of a 3-

factor solution was found for the ERIAL scale, and Evidence for a 5-factor solution was found 

for the EERSP scale (see Table 22). 

Table 22 

Factorial Structures for ERIAL Scale and EERSP Scale 

ERIAL Scale Factors 
1  

2  
3  
EERSP Scale Factors 

Personal ERI Awareness 

Systemic ERI Awareness 
Accountability to Learning about ERI 

1 

2 
3 

4 
5 

Color Conscious Exposure 

Affirmation of Blackness 
Discussion of Physical Features 

Cultivation of Empathy 
Curation of Window and Mirror Environments 

139 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
Reciprocal Healthy Ethnic-Racial Identity Development Model 

The findings from Study 1 clarified the capacities that infants and toddlers bring to the 

RERID model, and the findings from Study 2 extrapolated what caregivers can bring to RERID 

model. Findings from both studies were effectuated to revise the RERID model. The revised 

model includes the distinction of Healthy ERI making it the Reciprocal Healthy Ethnic-Racial 

Identity (RHERID) Model (see Figure 10).    

Organization of the Reciprocal Healthy Ethnic-Racial Identity Development (RHERID) 

Model  

In the revised RHERID model, the position of the caregiver image was moved to the left 

side of the figure and the image of the child was moved to the right side. This orientation shift 

was made to indicate that the caregiver actions precede the developmental influence on the child. 

Both the caregiver image and the child image are positioned within circles to indicate the 

intersectional social identities (i.e. individual factors; Williams et al, 2020) of each individual 

that interact with the various levels of cultural context. The concept of culture as a micro system 

(Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017) is represented by the background spiral. The two arrow text boxes 

indicate what caregivers and children bring to the RHERID process. Caregiver contributions are 

presented as the three factors of the ERIAL scale measure: Personal ERI Awareness, Systemic 

ERI Awareness, and Accountability to learning about ERI. 

Infant and toddler contributions are presented as the biopsychosocial factors that are 

innate in typically developing young children (Kranzler et al., 2020). Building from the 

bioecological systems theory was previously incorporated into the original RERID model 

(Williams et al., 2020), the biopsychosocial ecological model was also included in the expanded 

conceptualization of the RHERID model. 

140 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 10 

Reciprocal Healthy Ethnic-Racial Identity (RHERID) Model 

Biopsychosocial factors are inclusive of things like genetics, and physical health (biological), 

mental health, and cognitive abilities (psychological), socioeconomic status, and life events 

(social; Kranzler et al., 2020). The biopsychosocial ecological model also encompasses the 

developmental outcomes described in Study 1: mental representation and familiarity, ERI 

awareness, inclusive preferences, and anti-bias behavior (Kranzler et al., 2020).  

When caregivers demonstrate personal ERI awareness, systemic ERI awareness, and 

accountability to ERI learning, their beliefs inform their JBERS practices. In the RHERID 

model, the five factors of the EERSP scale found in Study 2 have been collapsed into three 

JBERS Actions: color conscious exposure, intentional teaching (Affirmation of Blackness, 

Discussion of Physical Features, and Cultivation of Empathy), and inclusive environment 

curation (Curation of Windows and Mirrors Environments). Each of these actions contributes to 

141 

 
 
 
 
 
  
the shaping of biopsychosocial development outcomes exemplary of healthy ERI among infants 

and toddlers. 

Finally, there may be a reciprocal nature to JBERS beliefs and practices. It is thought that 

caregivers who demonstrate JBERS beliefs and engage in JBERS practices may further develop 

their own healthy ERI as a result. Preliminary evidence for this reciprocal dynamic was 

suggested in Study 2 when participants were asked the extent to which they agreed with the 

statement: “Considering how I will teach my toddler about race and ethnicity prompts me to 

reflect on what I learned in my own childhood”. Ninety-two percent of participants (n = 153) 

selected agree or strongly agree. Such reflective practice may allow caregivers to reassess their 

own early learning and reconsider their beliefs and build the capacity for more advanced critique 

that comes with age and new perspectives that come with caregiving roles. There is a reciprocal 

nature to the child’s process as well. As infants and toddlers experience JBERS, their 

biopsychosocial outcomes can be influenced in ways that promote the development of their 

healthy ERI and in turn expand their biopsychosocial skill capacity.  

Future Directions for Research 

Findings from this dissertation provide ample opportunities for future research. 

Replication of the scoping review in Study 1 could be valuable in the future to include studies 

published after March 6, 2023. Alternately, now that there is a better sense of the current state of 

the early ethnic-racial awareness literature, a systematic review may be more appropriate. 

Replication of Study 2 with a larger sample and the inclusion of additional ethnic-racial groups 

should also be considered in future research. Such an expansion would serve to further validate 

the new ERIAL scale and EERSP scale measures and also demonstrate adaptability of the 

measure across all ethnic-racial groups.    

142 

 
 
 
 
 
This dissertation makes a significant contribution to the literature but is just a first step. 

Clarifying the current state of the ERI and ERS literature for children zero to three years (Study 

1) and introducing new measures that are designed specifically for use with caregivers of the 

zero to age three population (Study 2) are valuable. However, future research should build upon 

the findings of this dissertation to examine associations between JBERS delivery and 

infant/toddler outcomes among diverse ethnic-racial groups and within varying cultural contexts. 

Ultimately, understanding the impact of JBERS on infants/toddlers and their caregivers is a goal 

of this research. 

Implications for Policy and Practice 

This dissertation offers a number of implications for policy and practice. The current 

sociopolitical context makes the topic of this research both highly relevant and precariously 

positioned. The topic of ethnic-racial identify development and socialization in early childhood 

is highly relevant in the U.S. context given the increasing ethnic-racial diversification of the 

population (e.g., Frey, 2023; Nishina & Witcow, 2019) and the rise of calls for social justice and 

equitable practices to be elevated across social systems (Gilliam, 2005; Iruka et al., 2020; Jemal 

& Bussey, 2022; Kendi, 2019). At the same time, the topic is precariously positioned amidst 

book ban campaigns (e.g., Goncalves et al., 2024), educational audits (e.g., Chapoco, 2023), and 

the systemic dismantling of justice advancing policy (e.g., Gupton & O’Sullivan, 2024). 

Findings from this dissertation can be leveraged in this moment to inform early childhood 

education curriculum and guide parenting practices for those who desire to engage in the 

resistance of movements seeking to erase the impacts of systemic oppression and minimize the 

meaning of ethnic-racial identity (e.g., Hazelbaker et al., 2021; Swanson et al, 2009; Waxman, 

2021). 

143 

 
 
 
 
 
Implications for practice include the use of the JBERS framework and the RHERID 

model to inform the development of resources to support caregiver development of JBERS 

capacity. Findings from this dissertation go beyond explaining why JBERS is important and 

begin to operationalize how capacity to engage in JBERS can be developed. Findings can be 

organized into educational workshops for parents, early educators, and staff in child serving 

organizations such as foster care agencies and child welfare programs. The ERIAL scale and 

EERSP scale specifically can be utilized to assess caregiver capacity to engage in JBERS and 

results can inform the customization of educational topics that would be most beneficial to 

individuals and groups wanting to increase their capacity to Engage in JBERS. Utilization of the 

ERIAL scale and EERSP scale overtime can demonstrate growth and guide continuing education 

efforts.  

Conclusion 

In sum, the findings from this dissertation underscore the critical role of early ethnic-

racial socialization (ERS) in shaping both individual and collective efforts toward dismantling 

systemic racism. By exploring the development of ethnic-racial awareness in infants and toddlers 

and examining caregivers' ERS practices, this research adds depth to the understanding of ERI 

development during the foundational first three years of life. The introduction of the new ERIAL 

and EERSP measurement tools provides a significant advancement in assessing caregivers' 

capacity for engaging in justice-based ethnic-racial socialization (JBERS). These findings have 

important implications for both theory and practice, particularly in the context of supporting 

caregivers and early educators in fostering healthy ethnic-racial identities in young children. 

However, this work also highlights key areas for future research, including the need for more 

inclusive studies that reflect the diversity of caregivers and children and a closer examination of 

144 

 
 
 
 
 
the long-term impacts of early ERS practices. Ultimately, the research presented in this 

dissertation contributes to the ongoing efforts to challenge and disrupt systems of oppression, 

offering a path forward for more intentional, transformative practices aimed at cultivating equity 

and justice from the earliest stages of development. 

145 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
REFERENCES 

Anzures, G., Wheeler, A., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, A. M., Heron-Delaney, M., Tanaka,  
J. W., & Lee, K. (2012). Brief daily exposures to Asian females reverses perceptual  
narrowing for Asian faces in Caucasian infants. Journal of Experimental Child  
Psychology, 112(4), 484–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.04.005 

Balas, B., Westerlund, A., Hung, K., & Nelson, C. A., III. (2011). Shape, color and the other-

race effect in the infant brain. Developmental Science, 14(4), 892–900.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01039.x 

Bar-Haim, Y., Ziv, T., Lamy, D., & Hodes, R. M. (2006). Nature and nurture in own-race face  

processing. Psychological Science, 17(2), 159–163.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01679.x 

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press. 

Buttelmann, D., Zmyj, N., Daum, M., & Carpenter, M. (2013). Selective imitation of in-group  

Over out-group members in 14-month-old infants. Child Development, 84(2), 422–
428. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01860.x 

Chapoco, R. (2023, April 25). Gov. Kay Ivey’s dismissal of early childhood education  

secretary brings criticism. Alabama Reflector.  
https://alabamareflector.com/2023/04/25/iveys-dismissal-of-early-childhood- 
education-secretary-leader-brings-sharp-criticism/ 

Fassbender, I., Teubert, M., & Lohaus, A. (2016). The development of preferences for own-race 
versus other-race faces in 3-, 6- and 9-month-old Caucasian infants. European Journal of 
Developmental Psychology, 13(1), 152–165. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2015.1073585 

Frey, W., 2023. New 2020 census data shows an aging America and wide racial gaps between 
generations, Brookings Institution. United States of America. Retrieved from 
https://coilink.org/20.500.12592/30x9qr on 22 Dec 2024. COI: 20.500.12592/30x9qr. 

García Coll, C., Lamberty, G., Jenkins, R., McAdoo, H. P., Crnic, K., Wasik, B. H., & Vázquez 
García, H. (1996). An integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in 
minority children. Child Development, 67(5), 1891–1914. 

Gilliam, W. (2005). Prekindergarteners Left Behind: Expulsion Rates in State Prekindergarten 

Systems. 

Goncalves, M. S. O., Langrock, I., LaViolette, J., & Spoon, K. (2024). Book bans in political  

context: Evidence from US schools. PNAS Nexus, 3(6), pgae197.    
https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae197 

146 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Gupton, J. T., & O’Sullivan, A. (2024). Critically framing Florida’s anti-Woke education reform 

movement. Journal of Educational Administration and History. 
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220620.2024.2376717 

Hayden, A., Bhatt, R. S., Joseph, J. E., & Tanaka, J. W. (2007). The other-race effect in infancy: 

Evidence using a morphing technique. Infancy, 12(1), 95–104. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7078.2007.tb00235.x 

Hazelbaker, T., Brown, C. S., Nenadal, L., & Mistry, R. (2021). Raising white resisters: 
Studying the development of anti-racist white children and youth. OSF. 
https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ej9a5 

Heron-Delaney, M., Anzures, G., Herbert, J. S., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Tanaka, J. W., Kang, 

L., & Pascalis, O. (2011). Perceptual training prevents the emergence of the other race 
effect during infancy. PLOS One, 6(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019858 

Howard, L. H., Henderson, A. M. E., Carrazza, C., & Woodward, A. L. (2015). Infants’ and 

young children’s imitation of linguistic in-group and out-group informants. Child 
Development, 86(1), 259–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12299 

Iruka, I., Curenton, S., Durden, T., & Escayg, K.A. (2020). Don’t look away: Embracing anti-

bias classrooms. https://www.kaplanco.com/product/33461/dont-look-away-embracing-
anti-bias-classrooms?c=16%7CTR1026 

Jemal, A., & Bussey, S.R., (2022). Liberatory education: We are the ones we’ve been waiting 

for. In M. Sykes, & K. Ostendorf. Child care justice: Transforming the system of care for 
young children. (pp. 20-47) Teachers College Press. 

Katz, P. A., & Kofkin, J. A. (1997). Race, gender, and young children. In Developmental 

psychopathology: Perspectives on adjustment, risk, and disorder (619144828; 1997-
08446-003; pp. 74, Chapter xxi, 618 Pages). Cambridge University Press, New York, 
NY.  

Kelly, D. J., Liu, S., Ge, L., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Lee, K., Liu, Q., & Pascalis, O. (2007). 
Cross-race preferences for same-race faces extend beyond the African versus Caucasian 
contrast in 3-month-old infants. Infancy, 11(1), 87–95. 
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327078in1101_4 

Kranzler, J. H., Floyd, R. G., Bray, M. A., & Demaray, M. K. (2020). Past, present, and future of 

research in school psychology: The biopsychosocial ecological model as an overarching 
framework. School Psychology, 35(6), 419–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000401  

Kendi, I. X. (2019). How to be an antiracist (First Edition). One World. 

147 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Liu, S., Xiao, W. S., Xiao, N. G., Quinn, P. C., Zhang, Y., Chen, H., Ge, L., Pascalis, O., & Lee, 
K. (2015). Development of visual preference for own- versus other-race faces in infancy. 
Developmental Psychology, 51(4), 500–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038835 

Nishina, A., & Witkow, M. R. (2019). Why developmental researchers should care about 

biracial, multiracial, and multiethnic youth. Child Development Perspectives, 14(1), 21–
27. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12350 

Piaget, J. (1971). The theory of stages in cognitive development. In D. R. Green, M. P. Ford, & 

G. B. Flamer, Measurement and Piaget. McGraw-Hill. 

Pickron, C. B., Fava, E., & Scott, L. S. (2017). Follow my gaze: Face race and sex influence 

gaze-cued attention in infancy. Infancy, 22(5), 626–644. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/infa.12180 

Spencer, M. B., 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. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579497001454 

Sugden, N. A., & Marquis, A. R. (2017). Meta-analytic review of the development of face 

discrimination in infancy: Face race, face gender, infant age, and methodology moderate 
face discrimination. Psychological Bulletin, 143(11), 1201–1244. 
https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000116 

Swanson, D. P., Cunningham, M., Youngblood, J., & Spencer, M. B. (2009). Racial identity 

development during childhood. 15. 

Vélez-Agosto, N. M., Soto-Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, M., Vega-Molina, S., & 

García Coll, C. (2017). Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture 
from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), 900–910. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617704397 

Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological  

processes. Harvard University Press.  

Waxman, S. R. (2021). Racial awareness and bias begin early: Developmental entry points, 

challenges, and a call to action. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(5), 893–902. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211026968 

Williams, C. D., Byrd, C. M., Quintana, S. M., Anicama, C., Kiang, L., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., 

Calzada, E. J., Pabón Gautier, M., Ejesi, K., Tuitt, N. R., Martinez-Fuentes, S., White, L., 
Marks, A., Rogers, L. O., & Whitesell, N. (2020). A lifespan model of ethnic-racial 
identity. Research in Human Development, 17(2–3), 99–129. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2020.1831882 

148