The own-race bias (ORB) is the tendency for perceivers to better recognize own-race than cross-race (CR) faces. Perceptual approaches to understanding this effect suggest that perceivers typically have low levels of processing experience with CR faces, resulting in poor recognition memory. However, social–cognitive models have demonstrated that perceiver motivation can also influence CR recognition accuracy. The current work bridges these two literatures by exploring how participants' CR experience might facilitate the ability to recognize CR faces when combined with perceiver motivation. In Experiment 1, we demonstrate that motivation translates into superior CR recognition only for perceivers who have relatively extensive prior experience with individuating CR faces. In Experiment 2, we find that a lack of experience with CR faces can be overcome in situations where perceivers are highly motivated to individuate CR faces.
AckermanJ. M.ShapiroJ. R.NeubergS. L.KenrickD. T.BeckerD. V.GriskeviciusV.SchallerM. (2006). They all look the same to me (unless they’re angry): From out-group homogeneity to out-group heterogeneity. Psychological Science, 17, 836–840.
2.
AdamsR. B.JrPaukerK.WeisbuchM. (2010). Looking the other way: The role of gaze direction in the cross-race memory effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 478–481.
3.
AdolphsR. (2002). Recognizing emotion from facial expressions: Psychological and neurological mechanisms. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 1, 21–62.
4.
BeaupréM. G.HessU. (2005). Cross-cultural emotion recognition among Canadian ethnic groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 26, 355–370.
5.
BernsteinM. J.YoungS. G.HugenbergK. (2007). The Cross-category effect: Mere social categorization is sufficient to elicit an Own-Group Bias in face recognition. Psychological Science, 18, 706–712.
6.
BrighamJ. C.MaassA.SnyderL. D.SpauldingK. (1982). Accuracy of eyewitness identifications in a field setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 673–681.
7.
GauthierI.TarrM. J. (1997). “Becoming a “Greeble” expert: Exploring mechanisms for face recognition”. Vision Research, 37, 1673–1682.
8.
HancockK. J.RhodesG. (2008). Contact, configural coding, and the other-race effect in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 99, 45–56.
9.
HugenbergK.CorneilleO. (2009). Holistic processing is tuned for ingroup faces. Cognitive Science, 33, 1173–1181.
10.
HugenbergK.MillerJ.ClaypoolH. (2007). Categorization and individuation in the cross-race recognition deficit: Toward a solution to an insidious problem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 334–340.
11.
HugenbergK.SaccoF. (2008). Social categorization and stereotyping: How social categorization biases person perception and face memory. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1052–1072.
12.
HugenbergK.YoungS. G.BernsteinM. J.SaccoD. F. (2010). The categorization-individuation model: An integrative account of the cross race recognition deficit. Psychological Review, 117, 1168–1187.
13.
JacksonM. C.WuC. Y.LindenD. E.RaymondJ. E. (2009). Enhanced visual short-term memory for angry faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 363–374.
14.
LevinD. T. (1996). Classifying faces by race: The structure of face categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1364–1382.
15.
LevinD. T. (2000). Race as a visual feature: Using visual search and perceptual discrimination tasks to understand face categories and the cross-race recognition deficit. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 559–574.
16.
MalpassR. S.KravitzJ. (1969). Recognition for faces of own and other race. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 330–334.
17.
MeissnerC. A.BrighamJ. C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 3–35.
18.
MichelC.RossionB.HanJ.ChungC.CaldaraR. (2006). Holistic processing is finely tuned for faces of our own race. Psychological Science, 17, 608–615.
19.
NgW.LindsayR. C. L. (1994). Cross race facial recognition: Failure of the contact hypothesis. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 217–232.
20.
ÖhmanA.LundqvistD.EstevesF. (2001). The face in the crowd revisited: A threat advantage with schematic stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 381–396.
21.
PaukerK.WeisbuchM.AmbadyN.SommersS. R.AdamsR. B.JrIvcevicZ. (2009). Not so Black and White: Memory for ambiguous group members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 795–810.
22.
PlatzS. J.HoschH. M. (1988). Cross-racial/ethnic eyewitness identification: A field study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 11, 972–984.
23.
RhodesG.BrakeS.TaylorK.TanS. (1989). Expertise and configural coding in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 313–331.
24.
RhodesG.LieH. C.EwingL. A.EvangelistaE.TanakaJ. W. (2010). Does perceived race affect discrimination and recognition of ambiguous-race faces? A test of the socio-cognitive hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 36, 217–223.
25.
RhodesG.LockeV.EwingL.EvangelistaE. (2009). Race coding and the other-race effect in face recognition. Perception, 38, 232–241.
26.
RuleN. O.AmbadyN.AdamsR. B.JrMacraeC. N. (2007). Us and them: Memory advantages in perceptually ambiguous groups. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 687–692.
27.
SangrigoliS.PallierC.ArgentiA.-M.VentureyraV. A. G.de SchonenS. (2005). Reversibility of the other-race effect in face recognition during childhood. Psychological Science, 16, 440–444.
28.
ShriverE.HugenbergK. (2010). Power, individuation and the cross-race recognition deficit. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 767–774.
29.
SnodgrassJ. C.CorwinJ. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 34–50.
30.
SporerS. L. (2001). Recognizing faces of other ethnic groups: An integration of theories. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 36–97.
31.
TanakaJ. W. (2001). The entry point of face recognition: Evidence for face expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 534–543.
32.
TanakaJ. W.KieferM.BukachC. M. (2004). A holistic account of the own-race effect in face recognition: evidence from a cross-cultural study. Cognition, 93, 1–9.
33.
TanakaJ. W.PierceL. J. (2009). The neural plasticity of other-race face recognition. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 122–131.
34.
TottenhamN.TanakaJ.LeonA. C.McCarryT.NurseM.HareT. A.NelsonC. A. (2009). The NimStim set of facial expressions: Judgments from untrained research participants. Psychiatry Research, 168, 242–249.
35.
WrightD. B.BoydC. E.TredouxC. G. (2003). Interracial contact and the own-race bias for face recognition in South Africa and England. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 365–373.
36.
YoungS. G.BernsteinM. J.HugenbergK. (2010). When do own-group biases in face recognition occur? Encoding versus post-encoding. Social Cognition, 28, 240–250.
37.
YoungS. G.HugenbergK. (2010). Mere social categorization modulates identification of facial expressions of emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 964–977.
