Gender differences in recognition memory for faces and cars: Evidence for the interest hypothesis

Abstract

Two experiments investigated gender differences in recognition memory for faces and cars. Stimuli were line drawings of cars and of adult men and women (Experiment 1) and photographs of real cars and of real boys and girls (Experiment 2). In both experiments, performance was better on faces than on cars. Regarding recognition memory for men's faces, in Experiment 1, men's scores were higher than women's scores. However, in Experiment 2, men recognized more cars than did women, and women recognized more children than did men. Results are generally consistent with the hypothesis that memory reflects male and female interest in, and/or differential familiarity for, different kinds of material.Peer effects have been found in recognition memory for faces. Research shows that people are generally more accurate on own-race and gender faces than on other-race and gender faces (Bothwell, Brigham, & Malpass, 1989; McKelvie, 1981;Shapiro & Penrod, 1986). However, the gender effect is more reliable for women than for men, and women perform better than men on faces of children, leading McKelvie (1981) to propose that gender differences may be mediated by differential interest. To test this hypothesis, he suggested that researchers might investigate memory for material expected to be of particular interest to men and to women.Recently, in a developmental study of children and adults, Davies and Robertson (1993) invoked the interest hypothesis to account for their findings that males clearly recognized more photographs of automobiles than did females, whereas females tended to recognize more female faces than did males. Experiment 1 of the present study was also designed to compare memory for faces and cars with memory for adult men and women. However, male faces were included and pictures were shown in the form of line drawings to test the generality of the automobile superiority effect for males. cated at random to the presentation set, and all stimuli constituted the test set. For this purpose, they were paired randomly, with the restriction that each stimulus appear beside another from the same class.Procedure. The subjects were tested in a laboratory in small groups. During Session I, they were shown each of the 40 faces or cars for 5 sec and instructed to memorize the material for a test 48 h later. During this test, the 80 pairs were shown for 10 sec, during which the subjects recorded whether the original picture was on the left or the right.

The Role of Gender in Face Recognition

“…Somewhat conflicting findings are reported for object recognition of nameable and abstract pictures, showing both female and male advantage, or no sex differences (Cherney & Ryalls, 1999;Goldstein & Chance, 1970;Lewin et al, 2001;McGivern et al, 1997;Postma et al, 2004). The conflicting results can reflect sex differences in interest and prior knowledge of the items included in the memory task (see, e.g., McKelvie, Standing, St. Jean & Law, 1993;McGivern et al, 1997). For example, when episodic memory required spatial processing, men were found to outperform women (Lewin et al, 2001) However in spatial tasks measuring the ability to memorize the position (i.e., object location) of earlier viewed objects some studies have reported a female advantage and others report no sex differences (Postma, Jager, Kessels, Koppeschaar & van Honk, 2004;Silverman & Eals, 1992).…”

“…For example, men could be more proficient at recognizing male faces than female faces, without the presence of any sex differences for male faces (see Figure 4). The evidence so far reveals that women show an own-sex bias, that is, they recognize more female than male faces (e.g., Feinman & Entwisle, 1976;Lewin & Herlitz, 2002;Wright & Sladden, 2003; but see also McKelvie, 1981McKelvie, , 1987McKelvie et al, 1993). In contrast, men generally do not show an own-sex bias.…”

“…Although earlier research is sparse, studies taking the gender of faces into account have revealed that females more accurately recognize females' faces than men do. No studies reporting a male advantage in recognizing female faces have been found (Cross et al, 1971;Ellis, Shepherd & Bruce, 1973;Feinman & Entwisle, 1976;Going & Read, 1974;Lewin & Herlitz, 2002;McKelvie, 1981;McKelvie, 1987;McKelvie et al, 1993;Vokey & Read, 1988;Wright & Sladden, 2003;Yarmey, 1974).…”

“…In contrast, men generally do not show an own-sex bias. Instead, some studies show that men remember female and male faces equally well (e.g., Cross et al, 1971;Going & Read, 1974;Lewin & Herlitz, 2002) or that men, just like women, recognize more female faces (Feinman & Entwisle, 1976;McKelvie et al, 1993). Few studies have shown a male own-sex bias (Feinman & Entwisle, 1976;Wright & Sladden, 2003 With regard to explanations of the female own-sex bias, it has been suggested that it is found because females pay more attention to other females (e.g., Cross et al, 19971;McKelvie, 1981), especially attractive and familiar female faces (i.e., of the same age and ethnicity).…”

Greater visual averaging of face identity for own-gender faces

“…The owngender advantage in face recognition is generally explained in terms of differences in interest and motivation (McKelvie, Standing, St. Jean, & Law, 1993) or perceptual expertise (Lovén, Herlitz, & Rehnman, 2011). In the present article, we investigated whether the own-gender advantage would also be evident when observers had to indicate whether a test face had been present in a previously seen set of faces, and the face could be either a true set member or a morphed average of all set members.…”