Advertisement

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 1089–1092 | Cite as

Recognizing faces across continents: The effect of within-race variations on the own-race bias in face recognition

  • Patrick M. ChiroroEmail author
  • Colin G. Tredoux
  • Stephano Radaelli
  • Christian A. Meissner
Brief Reports

Abstract

People are better at recognizing faces of their own race than faces of other racial groups. This own-race bias (ORB) in face recognition manifests in some studies as a full crossover interaction between race of observer and race of face, but in others the interaction is accompanied by main effects or other complexities. We hypothesized that this may be due in part to unacknowledged within-race variation and the implicit assumption that the terms white and black describe perceptually homogeneous race categories. We therefore tested white and black South Africans on their recognition of black and white American faces and black and white South African faces. Our results showed the expected interaction, but only for South African faces. This finding supports explanations of the ORB that are premised on intergroup contact and perceptual experience and highlights the danger of assuming homogeneity of appearance within groups. Author Note

Keywords

Face Recognition Perceptual Experience Social Psychology Bulletin Intergroup Contact Contact Hypothesis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Antony, T., Copper, C., & Mullen, B. (1992). Cross-racial facial identification: A social cognitive integration. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 296–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bothwell, R. K., Brigham, J. C., & Malpass, R. S. (1989). Crossracial identification. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brigham, J. C., & Malpass, R. S. (1985). The role of experience and contact in the recognition of faces of own- and other-race persons. Journal of Social Issues, 41, 139–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chiroro, P., & Valentine, T. (1995). An investigation of the contact hypothesis of the own-race bias in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A, 879–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Levin, D. T. (1996). Classifying faces by race: The structure of face categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1364–1382.Google Scholar
  6. MacLin, O. H., & Malpass, R. S. (2001). Racial categorization of faces: The ambiguous race face effect. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 98–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Malpass, R. S. (1990). An excursion into utilitarian analyses, with side trips. Behavioral Science Research, 24, 1–15.Google Scholar
  8. Malpass, R. S. (1993). “They all look alike to me.” In M. Merrens & G. Brannigan (Eds.), The undaunted psychologist (pp. 74–88). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  9. Malpass, R. S., & Kravitz, J. (1969). Recognition for faces of ownand other-race faces. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 13, 330–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Meissner, C. A., & Brigham, J. C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Meissner, C. A., Brigham, J. C., & Butz, D. A. (2005). Memory for own- and other-race faces: A dual-process approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 545–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ng, W. J., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (1994). Cross-racial facial recognition: Failure of the contact hypothesis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rehnman, J., & Herlitz, A. (2006). Higher face recognition in girls: Magnified by own-sex and own-ethnicity bias. Memory, 14, 289–296.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. (1986). A meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 139–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sporer, S. L. (1999, July). The own-race bias in Germany: Testing the contact hypothesis with Turks and Germans. Paper presented at the 4th European Conference on Psychology and Law of the U.S. Psychology-Law Association and the European Psychology-Law Association, Dublin.Google Scholar
  16. Sporer, S. L. (2001). Recognizing faces of other ethnic groups: An integration of theories. Psychology, Public Policy, & Law, 7, 36–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Kidd, K. K. (2005). Intelligence, race and genetics. American Psychologist, 60, 46–59.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Tobias, P. V. (1972). The meaning of race (2nd ed.). Johannesburg: South African Institute of Race Relations.Google Scholar
  19. Walker, P. M., & Hewstone, M. A. (2006). Perceptual discrimination investigation of the own-race effect and intergroup experience. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 461–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Worden, N. (2000). The making of modern South Africa. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Wright, D. B., Boyd, C. E., & Tredoux, C. G. (2003). Inter-racial contact and the own race bias for face recognition in South Africa and England. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 365–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wright, D. B., & Stroud, J. N. (2002). Age differences in lineup identification accuracy: People are better with their own age. Law & Human Behavior, 26, 641–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick M. Chiroro
    • 1
    Email author
  • Colin G. Tredoux
    • 2
  • Stephano Radaelli
    • 1
  • Christian A. Meissner
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of PretoriaPretoriaSouth Africa
  2. 2.University of Cape TownCape TownSouth Africa
  3. 3.University of TexasEl Paso

Personalised recommendations