Training Participants to Focus on Critical Facial Features Does Not Decrease Own-Group Bias.
eye-tracking
face processing
own-group bias
training
visual exploration
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2019
2019
Historique:
received:
24
04
2019
accepted:
27
08
2019
entrez:
2
10
2019
pubmed:
2
10
2019
medline:
2
10
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The own-group recognition bias (OGB) might be explained by the usage of different face processing strategies for own and other-group faces. Although featural processing appears in general to impair face recognition ability when compared to configural processing (itself perhaps a function of acquired expertise), recent research has suggested that the OGB can be reduced by directing featural processing to group-discriminating features. The present study assessed a perceptual training task intended to replicate Hills and Lewis' (2006) findings: we trained White participants to focus more on discriminating parts of Black faces, in particular the bottom halves of the faces, expecting a reduction of the OGB as a consequence. Thirty participants completed the training task, and visual patterns of attention were recorded with an eye-tracking device. Results showed that even though participants modified their visual exploration according to task instructions, spending significantly more time on the lower halves of faces after training, the OGB unexpectedly increased rather than decreased. The difference seems to be a function of an increased false alarm rate, with participants reducing response criterion for other-group - but not own-group - faces after training.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31572266
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02081
pmc: PMC6753171
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
2081Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Wittwer, Tredoux, Py and Paubel.
Références
Cognition. 2004 Aug;93(1):B1-9
pubmed: 15110726
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60
pubmed: 19897823
Psychol Sci. 2008 Oct;19(10):998-1006
pubmed: 19000210
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2009 Mar;9(1):122-31
pubmed: 19246333
Nature. 2001 Apr 19;410(6831):890
pubmed: 11309606
J Vis. 2008 Jan 17;8(1):9.1-10
pubmed: 18318612
Cognition. 2008 Feb;106(2):1017-27
pubmed: 17524388
Br J Psychol. 1982 Feb;73(Pt 1):105-16
pubmed: 7059746
Mem Cognit. 2005 Jan;33(1):98-106
pubmed: 15915796
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1999 Jul;25(4):997-1010
pubmed: 10439505
Cogn Sci. 2009 Aug;33(6):1173-81
pubmed: 21585500
PLoS One. 2009;4(1):e4215
pubmed: 19156226
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 Sep;35(5):1105-22
pubmed: 19686008
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2011 May;137(1):1-9
pubmed: 21354541
Br J Psychol. 1975 Nov;66(4):409-26
pubmed: 1106805
Br J Psychol. 1989 Aug;80 ( Pt 3):313-31
pubmed: 2790391
PLoS One. 2008 Aug 20;3(8):e3022
pubmed: 18714387
Perception. 2003;32(9):1117-25
pubmed: 14651324
Cognition. 2013 Dec;129(3):586-97
pubmed: 24076536
Psychol Sci. 2006 Jul;17(7):608-15
pubmed: 16866747
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 05;11(2):e0148253
pubmed: 26849447
Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Aug;11(4):735-41
pubmed: 15581126
Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 1999 Feb;31(1):137-49
pubmed: 10495845
Front Psychol. 2013 Nov 26;4:863
pubmed: 24324449
Br J Psychol. 2008 Feb;99(Pt 1):45-56
pubmed: 17535471
Perception. 2009;38(2):232-41
pubmed: 19400432
PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e29714
pubmed: 22253762
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2006 Jun;59(6):996-1002
pubmed: 16885139
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1986 Jun;115(2):107-17
pubmed: 2940312