Two Strikes: Race and the Disciplining of Young Students
Abstract
There are large racial disparities in school discipline in the United States, which, for Black students, not only contribute to school failure but also can lay a path toward incarceration. Although the disparities have been well documented, the psychological mechanisms underlying them are unclear. In two experiments, we tested the hypothesis that such disparities are, in part, driven by racial stereotypes that can lead teachers to escalate their negative responses to Black students over the course of multiple interpersonal (e.g., teacher-to-student) encounters. More generally, we argue that race not only can influence how perceivers interpret a specific behavior, but also can enhance perceivers' detection of behavioral patterns across time. Finally, we discuss the theoretical and practical benefits of employing this novel approach to stereotyping across a range of real-world settings.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
After two identical misbehaviors, Black students are more often deemed troublemakers and subjected to harsher discipline than White students.
“Even when Black and White students engage in identical behavior, after just two misbehaviors, Black students are more often deemed 'troublemakers' and subjected to harsher discipline.”
From Fostering Belonging, Transforming Schools: The Impact of Restorative Practices (2023) · cites this paper as Okonofua and Eberhardt, 2015
Teachers randomly assigned to read about a Black student felt significantly more troubled by the student's behavior and suggested harsher discipline than teachers assigned to read about a White student.
“compared to those assigned to read about a White student, teachers randomly assigned to read about a Black student felt significantly more troubled by the student's behavior and suggested harsher discipline.”
From Fostering Belonging, Transforming Schools: The Impact of Restorative Practices (2023) · cites this paper as Okonofua and Eberhardt, 2015
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 32 · Cited by 731
- Authors
- Okonofua, J. A., & Eberhardt, J. L.
- Affiliations
- Stanford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Okonofua, Jason A.
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-04-08
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 617-624
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2131397370
- Cited by
- 731
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 108 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 79 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 80 · 2020: 99 · 2019: 71 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 164.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Education Discipline and Inequality
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Keywords
- Black students, racial stereotypes, teacher-student relationship, intergroup perception, school failure, incarceration risk
- MeSH terms
- School Teachers, Adult, Black or African American, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Psychological Theory, Punishment, Social Behavior, Stereotyping, Students, United States, Racism
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review