The Other-Race Effect Flashcards
THE OTHER RACE EFFECT (ORE)
MALPASS & KRAVITZ (1969)
- used face recognition task; reported 1st empirical demonstration w/observers performing statsig better at recognising own race > other race faces
- aka. ORE; best-replicated phenomena in literature; established by several meta-analyses; 50+ research years; replicated in several studies w/dif racial groups
- classically reflected by crossover interaction between pps race/faces in discrimination accuracy
SCHECK ET AL. (2003)
- real-world impact; focussed on eyewitness testimony failures w/severe consequences for false convictions/prison sentences for innocents incorrectly identified by eyewitness of other race
- US Innocence Project/Ronald Cotton case
BATE ET AL. (2019)
- investigation of ORE effects in security settings ie. failures of face matching by police/passport control
MCKONE ET AL. (2021)
- ORE impacts social interactions; revealed difficulties for person who failed to be recognised by other-race (“victim”) & person who didn’t recognise them (“perpetrator”)
MICHEL ET AL. (2006): METHOD (A)
- young student Caucasian/white faces unfamiliar to pps (Belgian/Chinese); neutral expressions
- study phase = pps memorised 20 faces from each race (3s on screen; 1s interval)
- recognition phase = forced-choice recognition on 40 individually given faces (20 target; 20 distractors)
MICHEL ET AL. (2006): RESULTS (A)
- STATSIG interaction! (p < .001)
- Caucasian pps recognised more Caucasian faces > Asian; vice versa for Asian pps
MAIN DEBATES
SOCIAL MOTIVATION VS PERCEPTUAL EXPERTISE
SOCIAL MOTIVATION
BERGER (1969); GALPER (1973)
- observers (particularly w/^ prejudiced racial attitudes) wouldn’t be motivated to differentiate other-race members -> weaker memory for faces
SOCIAL MOTIVATION: LEVIN (2000)
- ORE = tendency measure; individuals must think categorically about outgroup racial members -> processing facial features differently > own race
SOCIAL MOTIVATION: YOUNG ET AL. (2012)
- different facial features used w/own/other race faces; guided by social categorisation based on group membership (aka. race); same analysis applies to sex/age/etc.
PERCEPTUAL EXPERTISE
RHODES ET AL. (1989)
- lack of contact/visual experience w/other-race faces -> difficulty processing other-race faces configurally
- aka. other-race faces treated w/featural processing
PERCEPTUAL EXPERTISE: WAN ET AL. (2015)
- evidence provided that ORE size varies w/interracial experience amount pps have in the everyday
PERCEPTUAL EXPERTISE: MCKONE ET AL. (2019)
- recent study proposed specific developmental window (approx. 12y/o) where other-race face acquisition = facilitated -> reducing ORE effects
NEUROCOGNITIVE BASIS
GOLBY ET AL. (2001)
- FFA (fMRI)
VIZIOLI ET AL. (2010)
- N170 (EEG/ERPs)
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022)
- tDCS (to modulate ORE)
GOLBY ET AL. (2001): METHOD
- pps = 10 African Americans (AA)/10 European Americans (EA); 18-30 y/o
- stimuli = 42 AA/42 EA male neutral face photos; 42 antique radio photos & fixation cross
- task design = blocked; pps viewed stimuli under 6 conditions w/4 counterbalanced blocks (block = 6 AA or EA or radios or fixation crosses); 3500ms; told to remember stimuli for memory test
GOLBY ET AL. (2001): BEHAVIOURAL RESULTS
- no dif between EA/AA pps recognising antique radios
- EA pps = ^ recognition performance for EA > AA
- reversed for AA = ORE support
- robust ORE found in average
GOLBY ET AL. (2001): FMRI (FFA) RESULTS
- FFA defined for individual pps as voxels in fusiform gyrus/adjacent sulci
- STATSIG ^ active = viewing faces > objects
- contrast between same/other-race faces used VS objects to define FFA
- 2 previously established criteria for defining FFA used (1 = ^ stringent threshold (p < .0001); 2 = less stringent threshold (t = 2))
GOLBY ET AL. (2001): DISCUSSION
- beh results in accord w/other studies showing superior recognition memory for same-race > other-race faces
- fMRI results = sames associated w/^ FFA activation > others; FFA always ^ active for sames > others (84% pps)
- differential recruitment of FFA by dif race faces = difs in perceptual expertise derived from LTM in same/other face exposure
VIZIOLI ET AL. (2010): STIMULI
VIZIOLI ET AL. (2010): PROCEDURE
VIZIOLI ET AL. (2010): BEHAVIOURAL RESULTS
VIZIOLI ET AL. (2010): N170/P08 CHANNEL RESULTS
VIZIOLI ET AL. (2010): DISCUSSION
BEH RESULTS
- Western Caucasian/East Asian observers = ^ accurate in recognising sames > others; indexed by larger inversion effect recorded for same VS other
N170 RESULTS
- face-inversion effect amplitude = largest for sames > others
- reduced other-race beh/N170 inversion effect could be due to reduced expertise at scrutinising configural info
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): PERCEPTUAL EXPERTISE HYPOTHESIS
- if ORE component = reduced perceptual expertise for others -> tDCS procedure should alter it via disrupting perceptual expertise component for sames (ie. ^ familiar)
- little/no effect should be expected for others (ie. not as familiar)
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): SOCIAL MOTIVATION HYPOTHESIS
- if we assume pps have visual expertise for both own/others (aka. they’re all faces) & ORE is specifically based on social motivation lack => tDCS procedure would reduce FIE for both own/others & ORE = still STATSIG
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): STIMULI
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): PROCEDURE
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): RESULTS (SHAM GROUP)
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): RESULTS (ANODAL GROUP)
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): ADDITIONAL BETWEEN-GROUP ANALYSIS
CIVILE & MCLAREN (2022): DISCUSSION
- FIE for sames = STATSIG reduced by anodal tDCS > sham -> cross-race interaction (ORE index) = no longer STATSIG
- perceptual expertise (manifesting via perceptual learning) for upright faces taken from familiar (aka. sames) category contributes to ORE
- specific tDCS procedure developed in perceptual learning lit can modulate FIE for sames -> full ORE reduction
