Research on face impressions has often focused on a fixed, universal architecture, treating regional variability as noise. Here, we demonstrated a crucial yet neglected role of cultural learning processes in forming face impressions. In Study 1, we found that variability in the structure of adult perceivers’ face impressions across 42 world regions (N = 287,178) could be explained by variability in the actual personality structure of people living in those regions. In Study 2, data from 232 world regions (N = 307,136) revealed that adult perceivers use the actual personality structure learned from their local environment to form lay beliefs about personality, and these beliefs in turn support the structure of perceivers’ face impressions. Together, these results suggest that people form face impressions on the basis of a conceptual understanding of personality structure that they have come to learn from their regional environment. The findings suggest a need for greater attention to the regional and cultural specificity of face impressions.
AlesinaA.DevleeschauwerA.EasterlyW.KurlatS.WacziargR. (2003). Fractionalization. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2), 155–194.
2.
AllikJ.ChurchA. T.OrtizF. A.RossierJ.HrˇebícˇkováM.de FruytF.RealoA.McCraeR. R. (2017). Mean profiles of the NEO Personality Inventory. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 48(3), 402–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117692100
3.
AtkinsonQ. D.MeadeA.VendittiC.GreenhillS. J.PagelM. (2008). Languages evolve in punctuational bursts. Science, 319(5863), Article 588. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1149683
4.
BentzC.DediuD.VerkerkA.JagerG. (2018). The evolution of language families is shaped by the environment beyond neutral drift. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(11), 816–821. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0457-6
5.
BirkásB.DzhelyovaM.LábadiB.BereczkeiT.PerrettD. I. (2014). Cross-cultural perception of trustworthiness: The effect of ethnicity features on evaluation of faces’ observed trustworthiness across four samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, 56–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.05.012
6.
CaldaraR. (2017). Culture reveals a flexible system for face processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(3), 249–255.
7.
ChurchA. T.KatigbakM. S. (2002). The five-factor model in the Philippines. In McCraeR. R.AllikJ. (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 129–154). Springer.
8.
CollovaJ. R.SutherlandC. A.RhodesG. (2019). Testing the functional basis of first impressions: Dimensions for children’s faces are not the same as for adults’ faces. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(5), 900–924.
DotschR.HassinR. R.TodorovA. (2016). Statistical learning shapes face evaluation. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(1), Article 0001. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0001
11.
Educational Testing Service. (2021). TOEFL iBT: Test and score data summary 2020.
12.
Education First. (2020). EF English Proficiency Index: Global ranking of countries and regions. https://www.ef.com/wwen/epi
13.
ElfenbeinH. A.MandalM. K.AmbadyN.HarizukaS.KumarS. (2002). Cross-cultural patterns in emotion recognition: Highlighting design and analytical techniques. Emotion, 2(1), 75–84.
14.
FeldmanHallO.DunsmoorJ. E.TomparyA.HunterL. E.TodorovA. T.PhelpsE. A. (2018). Stimulus generalization as a mechanism for learning to trust. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 115(7), E1690–E1697.
15.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J. C.GlickP. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(2), 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
16.
GülgözS. (2002). Five-factor model and NEO-PI-R in Turkey. In McCraeR. R.AllikJ. (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 175–196). Springer.
17.
HanC.WangH.HahnA. C.FisherC. I.KandrikM.FasoltV.MorrisonD. K.LeeA. J.HolzleitnerI. J.DeBruineL. M.JonesB. C. (2018). Cultural differences in preferences for facial coloration. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(2), 154–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.11.005
18.
HehmanE.SutherlandC. A. M.FlakeJ. K.SlepianM. L. (2017). The unique contributions of perceiver and target characteristics in person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(4), 513–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000090
19.
HillsP. J.PakeJ. M. (2013). Eye-tracking the own-race bias in face recognition: Revealing the perceptual and socio-cognitive mechanisms. Cognition, 129(3), 586–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.08.012
20.
HirschmanA. O. (1945). National power and the structure of foreign trade. University of California Press.
21.
HolmanE. W.WichmannS.BrownC. H.VelupillaiV.MüllerA.BakkerD. (2008a, June). Advances in automated language classification [Paper presentation]. 3rd Workshop on Quantitative Investigations in Theoretical Linguistics (QITL3), Helsinki, Finland.
22.
HolmanE. W.WichmannS.BrownC. H.VelupillaiV.MüllerA.BakkerD. (2008b). Explorations in automated language classification. Folia Linguistica, 42(2), 331–354.
23.
HolzleitnerI. J.PerrettD. I. (2017). Women’s preferences for men’s facial masculinity: Trade-off accounts revisited. Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, 274(3), 1–17.
24.
HönekoppJ. (2006). Once more: Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Relative contributions of private and shared taste to judgments of facial attractiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(2), 199–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.199
25.
JackR. E.GarrodO. G. B.YuH.CaldaraR.SchynsP. G. (2012). Facial expressions of emotion are not culturally universal. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 109(19), 7241–7244. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1200155109
26.
JohnsonJ. A. (2005). Ascertaining the validity of individual protocols from Web-based personality inventories. Journal of Research in Personality, 39(1), 103–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2004.09.009
27.
JohnsonJ. A. (2014). Measuring thirty facets of the five factor model with a 120-item public domain inventory: Development of the IPIP-NEO-120. Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 78–89.
28.
JonesB. C.DeBruineL. M.FlakeJ. K.LiuzzaM. T.AntfolkJ.ArinzeN. C.NdukaiheI. L G.BloxsomN. G.LewisS. C.ForoniF.WillisM. L.CubillasC. P.VadilloM. A.TurieganoE.GileadM.SimchonA.SaribayS. A.OwsleyN. C.JangC.MburuG.. . . ColesN. A. (2021). To which world regions does the valence-dominance model of social perception apply?Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-01007-2
29.
KriegeskorteN.MurM.BandettiniP. (2008). Representational similarity analysis – connecting the branches of systems neuroscience. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 2, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.06.004.2008
30.
LiangK.-Y.ZegerS. L. (1986). Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models. Biometrika, 73(1), 13–22.
31.
LinC.KelesU.AdolphsR. (2021). Four dimensions characterizing trait attributions from faces. Nature Communications, 12, Article 5168. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25500-y
32.
LukaszewskiA. W.GurvenM.von RuedenC. R.SchmittD. P. (2017). What explains personality covariation? A test of the socioecological complexity hypothesis. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(8), 943–952.
33.
MaD. S.CorrellJ.WittenbrinkB. (2015). The Chicago Face Database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1122–1135.
34.
MartinezJ. E.FunkF.TodorovA. (2020). Quantifying idiosyncratic and shared contributions to stimulus evaluations. Behavior Research Methods, 52, 1428–1444.
35.
McCraeR. R. (2001). Trait psychology and culture: Exploring intercultural comparisons. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 819–846.
36.
McCraeR. R. (2002). NEO-PI-R data from 36 cultures. In McCraeR. R.AllikJ. (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 105–125). Springer.
37.
McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52(5), 509–516.
38.
McCraeR. R.TerraccianoA. (2005). Personality profiles of cultures: Aggregate personality traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 407–425.
39.
McCraeR. R.YikM. S.TrapnellP. D.BondM. H.PaulhusD. L. (1998). Interpreting personality profiles across cultures: Bilingual, acculturation, and peer rating studies of Chinese undergraduates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 1041–1055.
40.
OhD.DotschR.PorterJ.TodorovA. (2020). Gender biases in impressions from faces: Empirical studies and computational models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(2), 323–342. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000638
41.
OhD.Grant-VillegasN.TodorovA. (2020). The eye wants what the heart wants: Females’ preference in male faces are related to partner personality preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(11), 1328–1343. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000858
42.
OosterhofN. N.TodorovA. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 105(32), 11087–11092. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805664105
43.
PagelM.AtkinsonQ. D.MeadeA. (2007). Frequency of word-use predicts rates of lexical evolution throughout Indo-European history. Nature, 449(7163), 717–720. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06176
44.
PiedmontR. L.BainE.McCraeR. R.CostaP. T.Jr. (2002). The applicability of the five-factor model in a sub-Saharan culture. In McCraeR. R.AllikJ. (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 155–173). Springer.
45.
PiedmontR. L.ChaeJ.-H. (1997). Cross-cultural generalizability of the five-factor model of personality: Development and validation of the NEO PI-R for Koreans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28(2), 131–155.
RollandJ.-P. (2002). The cross-cultural generalizability of the five-factor model of personality. In McCraeR. R.AllikJ. (Eds.), The five-factor model of personality across cultures (pp. 7–28). Springer.
48.
RychlowskaM.MiyamotoY.MatsumotoD.HessU.Gilboa-SchechtmanE.KambleS.MulukH.MasudaT.NiedenthalP. M. (2015). Heterogeneity of long-history migration explains cultural differences in reports of emotional expressivity and the functions of smiles. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 112(19), E2429–E2436. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1413661112
49.
SchneiderD. J. (1973). Implicit personality theory: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 79(5), 294–309.
50.
SimakhodskayaZ. (2000, August). Russian revised NEO-PI-R: Concordant validity and relationship to acculturation [Paper presentation]. The 108th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.
51.
SørenW.HolmanE. W.BrownC. H. (Eds.) (2020). The ASJP database (Version 19.1). https://asjp.clld.org
52.
SotoJ. A.LevensonR. W. (2009). Emotion recognition across cultures: The influence of ethnicity on empathic accuracy and physiological linkage. Emotion, 9(6), 874–884.
53.
StolierR. M.HehmanE.FreemanJ. B. (2020). Trait knowledge forms a common structure across social cognition. Nature Human Behaviour, 4, 361–371. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0800-6
54.
StolierR. M.HehmanE.KellerM. D.WalkerM.FreemanJ. B. (2018). The conceptual structure of face impressions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 115(37), 9210–9215. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1807222115
55.
SutherlandC. A. M.BurtonN. S.WilmerJ. B.BloklandG. A. M.GermineL.PalermoR.CollovaJ. R.RhodesG. (2020). Individual differences in trust evaluations are shaped mostly by environments, not genes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 117(19), 10218–10224. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920131117
56.
SutherlandC. A. M.OldmeadowJ. A.SantosI. M.TowlerJ.BurtD. M.YoungA. W. (2013). Social inferences from faces: Ambient images generate a three-dimensional model. Cognition, 127(1), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.12.001
57.
SutherlandC. A. M.YoungA. W.MootzC. A.OldmeadowJ. A. (2015). Face gender and stereotypicality influence facial trait evaluation: Counter-stereotypical female faces are negatively evaluated. British Journal of Psychology, 106(2), 186–208.
58.
TodorovA.OhD. (2021). The structure and perceptual basis of social judgments from faces. In GawronskiB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 63, pp. 189–245). Academic Press.
59.
TodorovA.OlivolaC. Y.DotschR.Mende-SiedleckiP. (2015). Social attributions from faces: Determinants, consequences, accuracy, and functional significance. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 519–545.
60.
VeroskyS. C.TodorovA. (2010). Generalization of affective learning about faces to perceptually similar faces. Psychological Science, 21(6), 779–785. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610371965
61.
XieS. Y.FlakeJ. K.HehmanE. (2018). Perceiver and target characteristics contribute to impression formation differently across race and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(2), 364–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000160
62.
ZhangL.HolzleitnerI. J.LeeA. J.WangH.HanC.FasoltV.DeBruineL. M.JonesB. C. (2019). A data-driven test for cross-cultural differences in face preferences. Perception, 48(6), 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006619849382
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
