Perceptual Processes in the Cross-Race Effect: Evidence From Eyetracking

McDonnell, Gerald P.; Bornstein, Brian H.; Laub, Cindy; Mills, Mark; Dodd, Michael D.

doi:10.1080/01973533.2014.958227

Cited by 18 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In other words, people who were slower to fixate the eyes showed a more positive bias across trials (i.e., a behavioral tendency to rate surprise as positive), but this effect was moderated such that it was only observed in individuals who looked to the mouth early on in the trial. This is consistent with other work showing that time spent looking at the mouth is associated with individual differences in behavior, including a reduced cross race effect (i.e., participants that looked longer at the mouth of Black faces were better able to recognize those face identities than participants that looked less at the mouth; McDonnell et al, 2014). It could be that fixating the mouth is important in a way that either reduces holistic processing or gives more discernible information that is not conveyed by the eyes.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

All in the first glance: first fixation predicts individual differences in valence bias

Neta

Tong

Rosén

et al. 2016

Cognition and Emotion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surprised expressions are interpreted as negative by some people, and as positive by others. When compared to fearful expressions, which are consistently rated as negative, surprise and fear share similar morphological structure (e.g., widened eyes), but these similarities are primarily in the upper part of the face (eyes). We hypothesized, then, that individuals would be more likely to interpret surprise positively when fixating faster to the lower part of the face (mouth). Participants rated surprised and fearful faces as either positive or negative while eye movements were recorded. Positive ratings of surprise were associated with longer fixation on the mouth than negative ratings. There were also individual differences in fixation patterns, with individuals who fixated the mouth earlier exhibiting increased positive ratings. These findings suggest that there are meaningful individual differences in how people process faces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

All in the first glance: first fixation predicts individual differences in valence bias

Neta

Tong

Rosén

et al. 2016

Cognition and Emotion

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The comparisons for response bias and mean RTs did not reach statistical significance (c: p = 0.074; mean RTs: p = 0.094), although the pattern for mean RTs was in the expected direction. It is not unusual to obtain a recognition bias on some measures but not others in similar tasks ( Meissner and Brigham, 2001 ; McDonnell et al, 2014 ), therefore our data reflected the presence of an OAB.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 49%

“…The authors concluded that patterns of eye scanning during the encoding of unfamiliar faces are critically related to recognition. However, the finding that looking at the nose, rather than at the eye region, mediated correct identification is at odds with demonstrations that longer looking at the upper facial regions (i.e., hair, eyes) results in more accurate recognition of own-race faces ( McDonnell et al, 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Some recent studies have shown how culture affects the way people view faces: Western observers normally tend to look longer to the eye region (reflecting the use of analytic perceptual strategies), whereas East Asians tend to focus more on the nose region (possibly reflecting the use more holistic perceptual strategies; Blais et al, 2008 ; Caldara et al, 2010 ; Fu et al, 2012 ; Hills and Pake, 2013 ). While some studies found that these cross-cultural variations in scanning strategies do not differ for own- compared to other-race faces ( Blais et al, 2008 ; Caldara et al, 2010 ; Hills and Pake, 2013 ), other studies showed that these variations are modulated by face race (East Asian participants: Fu et al, 2012 ; Hu et al, 2014 ; Western participants: Goldinger et al, 2009 ; Wu et al, 2012 ; McDonnell et al, 2014 ). Western participants were found to make more fixations on the eye region of same-race faces compared to other-race faces, and to fixate longer the nose and mouth region of Asian compared to Caucasian faces (e.g., Goldinger et al, 2009 ); they are also reported to make a larger number of shorter fixations while exploring own-race compared to other-race faces, suggesting the use of more active scanning strategies for the former than the latter (e.g., Wu et al, 2012 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Visual scanning behavior is related to recognition performance for own- and other-age faces

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is well-established that our recognition ability is enhanced for faces belonging to familiar categories, such as own-race faces and own-age faces. Recent evidence suggests that, for race, the recognition bias is also accompanied by different visual scanning strategies for own- compared to other-race faces. Here, we tested the hypothesis that these differences in visual scanning patterns extend also to the comparison between own and other-age faces and contribute to the own-age recognition advantage. Participants (young adults with limited experience with infants) were tested in an old/new recognition memory task where they encoded and subsequently recognized a series of adult and infant faces while their eye movements were recorded. Consistent with findings on the other-race bias, we found evidence of an own-age bias in recognition which was accompanied by differential scanning patterns, and consequently differential encoding strategies, for own-compared to other-age faces. Gaze patterns for own-age faces involved a more dynamic sampling of the internal features and longer viewing time on the eye region compared to the other regions of the face. This latter strategy was extensively employed during learning (vs. recognition) and was positively correlated to discriminability. These results suggest that deeply encoding the eye region is functional for recognition and that the own-age bias is evident not only in differential recognition performance, but also in the employment of different sampling strategies found to be effective for accurate recognition.

show abstract

“…This explanation is referred to as the 'contact hypothesis,' which postulates that the ORB increases as social contact with other races decreases (Brigham et al, 1982;Cross, Cross, & Daly, 1971) because of a failure to select diagnostic features when encoding other-race faces (Brigham & Malpass, 1985;Goldstein & Chance, 1985;McDonnell, Bornstein, Laub, Mills, & Dodd, 2014;Meissner & Brigham, 2001). As a result of desegregation and improved interracial relations over the past several decades, researchers have proposed that increased exposure to other races may have generated cohort effects (Chance & Goldstein, 1996) in the amount of interracial contact that older and younger adults experience.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Age and lineup type differences in the own-race bias

Wylie

Bergt

Haby

et al. 2014

Psychology, Crime & Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The own-race bias (ORB) suggests that recognition for faces of one's own race is superior to recognition of other-race faces. A popular explanation for the ORB is amount of interracial contact, which may have cohort effects for older and younger adults. We compared White younger and older adults on the ORB utilizing a hybrid facial recognition and full diagnostic lineup (i.e., simultaneous and sequential target absent and target present lineups) paradigm. Both younger and older adults demonstrated an ORB. Signal detection estimates suggest younger adults compared to older adults have better discrimination accuracy for own-race over other-race faces. Interracial contact did not explain recognition for younger adults, but was related to a shift in response criterion for older adults.

show abstract

Perceptual Processes in the Cross-Race Effect: Evidence From Eyetracking

Cited by 18 publications

References 38 publications

All in the first glance: first fixation predicts individual differences in valence bias

All in the first glance: first fixation predicts individual differences in valence bias

Visual scanning behavior is related to recognition performance for own- and other-age faces

Age and lineup type differences in the own-race bias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About