Towards a synthetic model of own group biases in face memory

Hugenberg, Kurt; Wilson, John Paul; See, Pirita E.; Young, Steven G.

doi:10.1080/13506285.2013.821429

Cited by 78 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, the categorization-individuation model (CIM) suggests an interaction of perceptual, attentional, and motivational drivers to underlie the own-race bias [35], [39]. This model assumes that a face automatically activates category information, which in turn directs the observers' attention to category-defining facial features.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Other Side of the Fence: Effects of Social Categorization and Spatial Grouping on Memory and Attention for Own-Race and Other-Race Faces

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term “own-race bias” refers to the phenomenon that humans are typically better at recognizing faces from their own than a different race. The perceptual expertise account assumes that our face perception system has adapted to the faces we are typically exposed to, equipping it poorly for the processing of other-race faces. Sociocognitive theories assume that other-race faces are initially categorized as out-group, decreasing motivation to individuate them. Supporting sociocognitive accounts, a recent study has reported improved recognition for other-race faces when these were categorized as belonging to the participants' in-group on a second social dimension, i.e., their university affiliation. Faces were studied in groups, containing both own-race and other-race faces, half of each labeled as in-group and out-group, respectively. When study faces were spatially grouped by race, participants showed a clear own-race bias. When faces were grouped by university affiliation, recognition of other-race faces from the social in-group was indistinguishable from own-race face recognition. The present study aimed at extending this singular finding to other races of faces and participants. Forty Asian and 40 European Australian participants studied Asian and European faces for a recognition test. Faces were presented in groups, containing an equal number of own-university and other-university Asian and European faces. Between participants, faces were grouped either according to race or university affiliation. Eye tracking was used to study the distribution of spatial attention to individual faces in the display. The race of the study faces significantly affected participants' memory, with better recognition of own-race than other-race faces. However, memory was unaffected by the university affiliation of the faces and by the criterion for their spatial grouping on the display. Eye tracking revealed strong looking biases towards both own-race and own-university faces. Results are discussed in light of the theoretical accounts of the own-race bias.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Other Side of the Fence: Effects of Social Categorization and Spatial Grouping on Memory and Attention for Own-Race and Other-Race Faces

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compelling support for this account comes from studies that have found recognition biases analogous to the other-race effect for ambiguous-race faces (e.g., MacLin & Malpass, 2001) and for own-race faces that are considered to be out-group members along some other salient social dimension (Bernstein, Young, & Hugenberg, 2007;Rule, Ambady, Adams, & MacRae, 2007). Given the strong support for the roles of experience and categorization in the other-race effect, recent models have attempted to synthesize the two positions (Hugenberg, Wilson, See, & Young, 2013).…”

Section: The Other-race Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

The other-race effect in perception and recognition: Insights from the complete composite task.

Horry¹,

Cheong²,

Brewer³

2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People are more accurate at recognizing faces of their own race than faces from other races, a phenomenon known as the other-race effect. Other-race effects have also been reported in some perceptual tasks. Across three experiments, White and Chinese participants completed recognition tests as well as the complete paradigm of the composite task, which measures participants' abilities to selectively attend to the target region of a face while ignoring the task-irrelevant region of the face. Each task was completed with both own-and other-race faces. At a group level, participants showed significant own-race effects in recognition, but not in the composite task. At an individual difference level, the results provided no support for the hypothesis that a deficit in holistic processing for other-race faces drives the other-race effect in recognition. We therefore conclude that the other-race effect in recognition is not driven by the processes that underpin the composite effect.

show abstract

“…The need or desire to know others and see them as individuals can be an important determinant of visual attention (Hugenberg, Wilson, See, & Young, 2013;Kawakami et al, 2014;Levin, 2000;Rodin, 1987). Because people are more likely to see ingroup members as socially relevant (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990), the mere act of categorizing someone as part of an in-group can provoke patterns of face processing related to individuation (Hugenberg & Corneille, 2009;Ratner & Amodio, 2013;Van Bavel & Cunningham, 2012;Van Bavel, Packer, & Cunningham, 2008.…”

Section: Individuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual attention to members of own and other groups: Preferences, determinants, and consequences

Kawakami

Friesen

Vingilis-Jaremko

2018

Social & Personality Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many current and past theories of social categorization acknowledge and even underline the critical role that visual processing plays in intergroup misperceptions and biases, yet research that directly measures or manipulates these processes is limited. In the present paper, we reviewed the current literature on visual attention to own and other group faces. First, we explored the development of preferential attention in face processing. Next, we examined these processes in adults and show different patterns of attention for own and other group faces. Although we briefly consider cross-cultural variations, the focus of this review is on within-culture differences in visual attention. In particular, we explore preferential attention to specific features on own versus other group faces and to their overall faces. We also discuss potential determinants for differential attention such as experience, threat, individuation and a desire to know ingroups, and liking. Finally, we explore the implications of differential attention to own and other groups. These consequences range from reduced recognition of other group faces, to impaired identification of emotional expressions, to impeded interaction intentions, and to increased discrimination. Together our analyses provide strong evidence for differences in attention to the faces and eyes of own versus other group members and their role in intergroup biases.

show abstract

Towards a synthetic model of own group biases in face memory

Cited by 78 publications

References 95 publications

On the Other Side of the Fence: Effects of Social Categorization and Spatial Grouping on Memory and Attention for Own-Race and Other-Race Faces

On the Other Side of the Fence: Effects of Social Categorization and Spatial Grouping on Memory and Attention for Own-Race and Other-Race Faces

The other-race effect in perception and recognition: Insights from the complete composite task.

Visual attention to members of own and other groups: Preferences, determinants, and consequences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About