In the public domain, people who belong to systematically disadvantaged groups are often cast in a negative light. The discourse uses the language of deficit (e.g., ‘impaired’ cognition) and emphasizes (what are thought to be) flawed decisions (e.g., an ‘inability’ to delay gratification). This way, people are themselves blamed for the inequities they face. However:

1. Disparities between people from systematically advantaged and disadvantaged groups may often be the result of factors other than impaired ability. For instance, making learning and testing materials more relevant can help or hinder performance.

2. People also develop unique knowledge, perspectives, values, strengths, and strategies as a result of their lived experiences associated with their identity and background. For instance, they might be more attuned to other people’s thoughts and feelings.

3. People make decisions that can be understood as a response to their environment. For instance, they might invest less in future rewards if these are unlikely to materialize.