Inequity Frames and the Perceived Fairness of Inherited Historical Advantage Versus Disadvantage

People often fail to consider how historic and structural racism reinforce present-day racial inequity. In four experiments (N=1317), we consider whether presenting evidence of race-based historical privilege versus disadvantage is more effective at shifting perceptions of inequity and policy support. Using a 2 condition (advantage vs. disadvantage framing) between-subjects design, participants were randomly assigned to read about a college applicant whose education goals are either significantly facilitated or extinguished due to accumulated family (dis)advantage dating back to the 1800s (e.g., descendant of a slave owner or a slave). To test whether effects persisted beyond motivational factors (e.g., ideology), we also manipulated the country context, such that half read about the legacy of slavery in the U.S. and half read about the legacy of the Indian caste system. Benefitting from race-based advantage was perceived as fairer than being burdened by race-based disadvantage. This held in a zero-sum context (Study 3) and a racially-balanced sample (Study 4). We also find some evidence that inequity framing influences policy support via negative affect and fairness. Overall, we contribute to emerging understanding of how informational interventions affect perceptions of present day inequities by demonstrating that effectiveness of such interventions depends upon how inequity is framed. In so doing, we suggest that a bias toward tolerating inherited historical inequity when benefits rather than burdens are made salient—even when the inequity derives from clearly immoral origins—is an important psychological barrier toward changing public tolerance of present inequity and motivating support for policy solutions.