Do all kids look alike? Evidence for an other-age effect in adults.

Kuefner, Dana; Cassia, Viola Macchi; Picozzi, Marta; Bricolo, Emanuela

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.4.811

Cited by 126 publications

(189 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

173

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the participant age was closer to those of the adults pictured in the facial stimuli than to those of neonates, adult participants were more adept at categorizing adult faces than infant faces, leading to lower performance with neonate face stimuli. Indeed, adults have been shown to perform better when recognizing adult faces than with faces of different ages, resulting in an other-age effect (Kuefner et al, 2008;Lamont, Stewart-Williams, & Podd, 2005). Finally, by including the output from the GWF model in our analysis, we found that certain spatial Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is it a he or a she? Behavioral and computational approaches to sex categorization

Kaminski

Méary

Mermillod

et al. 2011

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can people categorize the sex of neonate faces? Our experiment tested the sex categorization of neonate faces by adult participants. We used a set of 120 Caucasian faces (adults and 4-day-old neonates) that were presented just once to a large sample of participants. A computational model of low-level visual processing, based on Gabor filters, was used to explore the relation between spatial-frequency information and sex categorization. The results showed that participants were able to categorize the sex of the faces, but were less accurate with neonate (d' = 0.36, β = -.97) than with adult (d' = 3.02, β = -.93) faces. Moreover, faces were more frequently categorized as boys' than girls' faces. The computational model suggests that specific spatialfrequency channels carry most of the useful information for the categorization task. Overall, the findings reveal that subtle differences in neonate facial structure were enough to allow the sex categorization of neonate faces, although accuracy was low in both adults and the computational model of low-level visual processing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…All were Caucasian, and none had children. The participants were selected prior to testing via a questionnaire to ensure that none had any extensive past exposure to infants' faces (Kuefner, Macchi Cassia, Picozzi, & Bricolo, 2008).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is it a he or a she? Behavioral and computational approaches to sex categorization

Kaminski

Méary

Mermillod

et al. 2011

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Anastasi and Rhodes (2005) asked children and adults to study photographs of children and adults, and in a subsequent recognition test both adults and children recognized own-age faces more accurately than other-age faces. This own-age bias in face recognition is well established in the literature, and the predominant theoretical accounts of the own-age bias suggest that it reflects more extensive experience with members of the same age group than with other age groups (Hills & Lewis, 2011;Kuefner, Macchi, Picozzi, & Bricolo, 2008).…”

Section: Own-age Biases In Adults' and Children's Joint Attention: Bimentioning

confidence: 96%

Own-age biases in adults’ and children’s joint attention: Biased face prioritization, but not gaze following!

Freebody

Kuhn

2018

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have reported own-age biases in younger and older adults in gaze following. We investigated own-age biases in social attentional processes between adults and children by focusing on two aspects of the joint attention process; the extent to which people attend towards an individual's face, and the extent to which they fixate objects that are looked at by this person (i.e., gaze following). Participants viewed images that always contained a child and an adult who either looked towards each other or each looked at objects located to their side. Observers consistently, and rapidly fixated the actor's faces, though the children were faster to fixate the child's face than the adult's faces, whilst the adults were faster to fixate on the adult's face than the child's face. The children also spent significantly more time fixating the child's face than the adult's face, and the opposite pattern of results was found for the adults. Whilst both adults and children prioritized objects when they were looked at by the actor, both groups showed equivalent levels of gaze following, and there was no own-age bias for gaze following. Our results show an own-age bias for prioritizing faces, but not gaze following.

show abstract

“…One reason for floor and ceiling effects potentially is the use of age-inappropriate stimuli. Given that the own-age bias exists in face perception, in which participants show a larger FIE for own-age than other-age faces (Anastasi & Rhodes, 2005;Harrison & Hole, 2009;Hills & Lewis, 2011;Kuefner, Macchi Cassia, Picozzi, & Bricolo, 2008), 5 in order to avoid floor effects, faces should be age-matched to the participants. In adults, the processing of other-group faces has been theoretically linked to not using the most expert configural processing system (Hugenberg & Corneille, 2009;Michel, Rossion, Han, Chung, & Caldara, 2006), which lowers performance in such tasks.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of face expertise: Evidence for a qualitative change in processing

Hills

Lewis

2018

Cognitive Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is conflicting evidence regarding the development of expert face recognition, as indexed by the face-inversion effect (FIE; de Heering, Rossion, & Maurer, 2011;Young and Bion, 1981) potentially due to the nature of the stimuli used in previous research. The developmental trajectory of the FIE was assessed in participants aged between 5-and 18-years using age-matched and adult stimuli. Four experiments demonstrated that upright face recognition abilities improved linearly with age (presumably due to improved memory storage capacities) and this was larger than for inverted faces. The FIE followed a stepped function, with no FIE for participants younger than 9-years of age. These results indicate maturation of expert face processing mechanisms that occur at the age of 10-years, similar to expertise in other domains.

show abstract

Do all kids look alike? Evidence for an other-age effect in adults.

Cited by 126 publications

References 25 publications

Is it a he or a she? Behavioral and computational approaches to sex categorization

Is it a he or a she? Behavioral and computational approaches to sex categorization

Own-age biases in adults’ and children’s joint attention: Biased face prioritization, but not gaze following!

The development of face expertise: Evidence for a qualitative change in processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About