Trustworthiness is a fundamental dimension underlying trait impressions of individual faces, and these impressions predict real-world social consequences. Building on ensemble coding research from the vision sciences, we explored to what extent statistical information about trustworthiness is gleaned from rapid exposure to crowds of faces. We showed that with half-second exposures to sets of eight faces, perceivers are sensitive to the set’s average level of trustworthiness (Study 1). Moreover, this group-level sensitivity biases individual group member evaluations (Study 2), as well as downstream social behavior related to those evaluations (Study 3), toward the mean of the group. Together, the findings add to a growing body of “people perception” research and show that even high-level social characteristics such as personality traits may be spontaneously gleaned from rapid exposure to crowds of faces.
AltN. P.GoodaleB.LickD. J.JohnsonK. L. (2019). Threat in the company of men: Ensemble perception and threat evaluations of groups varying in sex ratio. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(2), 152–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617731498
2.
AltN. P.PhillipsL. T. (2022). Person perception, meet people perception: Exploring the social vision of groups. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17(3), 768–787. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211017858
3.
AlwisY.HabermanJ. M. (2020). Emotional judgments of scenes are influenced by unintentional averaging. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5(1), 28.
4.
BarrettL. F.KensingerE. A. (2010). Context is routinely encoded during emotion perception. Psychological Science, 21(4), 595–599.
5.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
6.
BergJ.DickhautJ.McCabeK. (1995). Trust, reciprocity, and social history. Games and Economic Behavior, 10(1), 122–142.
7.
BlairI. V.JuddC. M.ChapleauK. M. (2004). The influence of Afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing. Psychological Science, 15(10), 674–679.
BrambillaM.BiellaM.FreemanJ. B. (2018). The influence of visual context on the evaluation of facial trustworthiness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 78, 34–42.
10.
CarragherD. J.LawrenceB. J.ThomasN.NichollsM. E. R. (2018). Visuospatial asymmetries do not modulate the cheerleader effect. Scientific Reports, 8, 2548. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-20784-5
11.
CarragherD. J.ThomasN. A.GwinnS. O.NichollsM. E. R. (2020). The cheerleader effect is robust to experimental manipulations of presentation time. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 32(5–6), 553–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2020.1776718
12.
CohenM. A.DennettD. C.KanwisherN. (2016). What is the bandwidth of perceptual experience?Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(5), 324–335.
DakinS. C.WattR. J. (1997). The computation of orientation statistics from visual texture. Vision Research, 37(22), 3181–3192.
15.
de FockertJ.WolfensteinC. (2009). Short article: Rapid extraction of mean identity from sets of faces. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(9), 1716–1722.
16.
EliasE.DyerM.SweenyT. D. (2017). Ensemble perception of dynamic emotional groups. Psychological Science, 28(2), 193–203.
17.
FreemanJ. B.PennerA. M.SapersteinA.ScheutzM.AmbadyN. (2011). Looking the part: Social status cues shape race perception. PLOS ONE, 6(9), Article e25107.
18.
FreemanJ. B.StolierR. M.BrooksJ. A. (2020). Dynamic interactive theory as a domain-general account of social perception. In GawronskiB. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 61, pp. 237–287). Academic Press.
19.
FreemanJ. B.StolierR. M.IngbretsenZ. A.HehmanE. A. (2014). Amygdala responsivity to high-level social information from unseen faces. The Journal of Neuroscience, 34(32), 10573–10581.
20.
GoldenbergA.WeiszE.SweenyT. D.CikaraM.GrossJ. J. (2021). The crowd-emotion-amplification effect. Psychological Science, 32(3), 437–450.
21.
GoodaleB. M.AltN. P.LickD. J.JohnsonK. L. (2018). Groups at a glance: Perceivers infer social belonging in a group based on perceptual summaries of sex ratio. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(11), 1660–1676.
22.
GreenD. M.SwetsJ. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. John Wiley.
23.
HabermanJ.HarpT.WhitneyD. (2009). Averaging facial expression over time. Journal of Vision, 9(11), 11–13.
24.
HabermanJ.WhitneyD. (2007). Rapid extraction of mean emotion and gender from sets of faces. Current Biology, 17(17), R751–R753.
25.
HehmanE.FlakeJ. K.FreemanJ. B. (2018). The faces of group members share physical resemblance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(1), 3–15.
26.
HehmanE.StolierR. M.FreemanJ. B.FlakeJ. K.XieS. Y. (2019). Toward a comprehensive model of face impressions: What we know, what we do not, and paths forward. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(2), e12431.
27.
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.
28.
HugenbergK.BodenhausenG. V. (2004). Ambiguity in social categorization: The role of prejudice and facial affect in race categorization. Psychological Science, 15(5), 342–345.
29.
JohnsonK. L.FreemanJ. B.PaukerK. (2012). Race is gendered: How covarying phenotypes and stereotypes bias sex categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(1), 116–131.
30.
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.Adil SaribayS.OwsleyN. C.JangC.. . .ColesN. A. (2021). To which world regions does the valence–dominance model of social perception apply?Nature Human Behaviour, 5(1), 159–169.
31.
JungW.BülthoffI.ArmannR. G. M. (2017). The contribution of foveal and peripheral visual information to ensemble representation of face race. Journal of Vision, 17(13), 11.
32.
LamerS. A.SweenyT. D.DyerM. L.WeisbuchM. (2018). Rapid visual perception of interracial crowds: Racial category learning from emotional segregation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(5), 683–701.
33.
LangnerO.DotschR.BijlstraG.WigboldusD. H. J.HawkS. T.van KnippenbergA. (2010). Presentation and validation of the Radboud Faces Database. Cognition and Emotion, 24(8), 1377–1388.
34.
LuoA. X.ZhouG. (2018). Ensemble perception of facial attractiveness. Journal of Vision, 18(8), 7.
35.
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.
36.
MasudaT.EllsworthP. C.MesquitaB.LeuJ.TanidaS.Van de VeerdonkE. (2008). Placing the face in context: Cultural differences in the perception of facial emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(3), 365–381.
37.
McPhersonM.Smith-LovinL.CookJ. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
38.
MillerA. L.SheldonR. (1969). Magnitude estimation of average length and average inclination. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81(1), 16–21.
39.
NeumannM. F.SchweinbergerS. R.BurtonA. M. (2013). Viewers extract mean and individual identity from sets of famous faces. Cognition, 128(1), 56–63.
40.
OosterhofN. N.TodorovA. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(32), 11087–11092.
41.
PhillipsL. T.SlepianM. L.HughesB. L. (2018). Perceiving groups: The people perception of diversity and hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(5), 766–785.
42.
PhillipsL. T.WeisbuchM.AmbadyN. (2014). People perception: Social vision of groups and consequences for organizing and interacting. Research in Organizational Behavior, 34, 101–127.
43.
RuleN. O.AmbadyN. (2008). The face of success: Inferences from chief executive officers’ appearance predict company profits. Psychological Science, 19(2), 109–111.
44.
StolierR. M.HehmanE. A.FreemanJ. B. (2018). A dynamic structure of social trait space. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(3), 197–200.
45.
SweenyT. D.HarozS.WhitneyD. (2013). Perceiving group behavior: Sensitive ensemble coding mechanisms for biological motion of human crowds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028712
46.
SweenyT. D.WhitneyD. (2014). Perceiving crowd attention: Ensemble perception of a crowd’s gaze. Psychological Science, 25(10), 1903–1913. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614544510
47.
TodorovA.MandisodzaA. N.GorenA.HallC. C. (2005). Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science, 308(5728), 1623–1626.
48.
TodorovA.PakrashiM.OosterhofN. N. (2009). Evaluating faces on trustworthiness after minimal time exposure. Social Cognition, 27(6), 813–833.
49.
van’t WoutM.SanfeyA. G. (2008). Friend or foe: The effect of implicit trustworthiness judgments in social decision-making. Cognition, 108(3), 796–803.
50.
WalkerD.VulE. (2014). Hierarchical encoding makes individuals in a group seem more attractive. Psychological Science, 25(1), 230–235.
51.
WatamaniukS. N.McKeeS. P. (1998). Simultaneous encoding of direction at a local and global scale. Perception & Psychophysics, 60(2), 191–200.
WillenbockelV.SadrJ.FisetD.HorneG. O.GosselinF.TanakaJ. W. (2010). Controlling low-level image properties: The SHINE toolbox. Behavior Research Methods, 42(3), 671–684.
54.
WillisJ.TodorovA. (2006). First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592–598.
55.
XieS. Y.FlakeJ. K.HehmanE. (2019). Perceiver and target characteristics contribute to impression formation differently across race and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(2), 364–385.
56.
YingH.BurnsE.LinX.XuH. (2019). Ensemble statistics shape face adaptation and the cheerleader effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(3), 421–436.
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.
