Best Travel Guide Suggestion Popular things to do on each destination

Theories of Other-Race Face Identification by Michaelle John Collins

Five hypotheses have been offered to explain the "other race" effect in face recognition (Ayuk, 1990, Chance and Goldstein, 1996):

1. The first hypothesis is an inherent difficulty between the races. Members of different racial groups are more difficult to distinguish from one another than any other racial group, so the saying goes, "All they seem." shared similarities within racial groups create and help maintain this effect. The few experiments investigating this proposal have shown mixed results. This hypothesis is difficult to prove due to difficulties in the discrimination can not be due to the physical similarity, but the inappropriate use of reference. The hypothesis can not be isolated from other effects sufficient to eliminate other possible factors on the other end of the race.
2. The second hypothesis is that prejudice can influence other identification of the race. However, no correlation between identification and attitudes has been found (Lavrakas, Buri, and Mayzner 1976, cf. Ayuk). Kent Yarmey and found no evidence of racial bias or attitude in the approach run. Prejudicial attitudes toward children, similar to the effects of the other effects of the race in which "all babies are alike," showed no effect. Subjects in the study reported feeling positive towards children. However, Brigham and Williamson (1979) found that bias affected the same race recognition memory of African Americans and Caucasians (cited in Yarmey, 1996).
3. Prior experience or knowledge of another race can also affect the processing of a face. Previous exposure to other races depends on cultural issues have been explored by Lindsay, Jack and Christian (1991). His hypothesis is that perceptual experience was needed for face recognition. Amount of experience affects the ability to distinguish one face from another. Similar representations of faces can interfere with each other, because the sides seem to share the same storage space. Ng and Lindsay (1994) examined the hypothesis of contact with Caucasians and eastern Canada and eastern Mexico . Contact others in the race for the East of Singapore, was very limited. They were able to replicate the effect of other race in the Eastern Oriental recognized faces better than whites, and whites recognized Caucasian faces better than the East. However, the differences between eastern Canada and Singapore is facing the eastern Caucasus was not significant. Therefore concluded that the issue of race was not related to the country of origin.
4. A fourth hypothesis is that the coding strategies used for individual recognition of the race itself are also used for the recognition of other faces of the race. These strategies are often less than perfect to see the faces of another race. Although evidence that individuals use different signals to ask someone to describe the faces of their own race against other sides, there is no evidence linking the use of reference and the other end of the race.
5. A fifth hypothesis is the differential processing. The subjects used differential processing due to inferences and judgments made during the initial display of other faces-race-y. In connection with this hypothesis is the level of processing (Craik and Lockhart, 1972). Of their own race faces are processed deeply about character traits possible, while other race faces are processed only superficially. The human face, however, is rich in perceptual information regardless of race. Part of the problem is the perceived similarity of stimuli and the difficulty of a precise list of features to describe a particular face. There seems to be no specific item, but a set of characteristics that defines one side of a particular race, as has been observed in facial recognition.

Traditionally, a facial recognition task used to examine the effect of other race (reviewed in Bothwell, Brigham, and Malpica, 1989). An initial set of target images of African Americans and Caucasian faces are shown to African Americans and Caucasians. Then the subjects were shown another set of faces, including images obtained with a random mixture set of distractor images. Subjects are required to do a trial of age for tables included in the set of objectives and a new disposition of those faces that are not part of the set target. Without prejudice to the responses are scored correct or incorrect, and recognition ability is valued by both correct and incorrect answers. bias for the race if there is a possibility of recognition is higher for the own images of the race than in other images of the race.

REFERENCES

Ayuk, RE (1990). ID-Racial Cross processed, unprocessed, and mixed race faces. International Journal of Psychology, 25, 509-527.

Bothwell, RK, Brigham, JC, and Malpass, RS (1989). -Racial Identification of the Cross. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 19-25.

Chance, JE, and Goldstein, AG (1996). The race effect and identification of witnesses. Psychological Issues in witness identification (153-176) Sporer, SL, Malpass, RS, and Koehnken, G. eds. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Ng, W., and Lindsay, RCL (1994). Cross race facial recognition: Failure of the Contact Hypothesis 217-232. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25,.

Yarmey, AD, and Kent, J. (1980). The eyewitness identification of older adults and youth.
Law and Behavior, 4, 359-371.