RUNNING HEAD: LOOKING AT RACE: EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEASURES OF OWN-RACE BIAS 1

Looking at Race: Explicit and Implicit Measures of Own-Race Bias

Elainna Simpson

Loras College
 2
LOOKING AT RACE: EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEASURES OF OWN-RACE BIAS

Introduction

Own-race bias (ORB) is the tendency for individuals to recognize faces within one’s own

race better than those from a different race. The development of the ORB begins at three months

where infants are shown to prefer to look at own-race faces. The ORB grows and occurs fully at

six months and more robustly at nine months. As children grow they begin to learn the norms of

their culture such as “looking patterns” and the categorization process of in-groups and out-

groups (Anzures, Quinn, Pascalis, Slater, & Lee, 2013). There is supporting evidence that

experience, especially at a young age, with other-race faces can work to correct the ORB

(Anzures, Quinn, Pascalis, Slater, & Lee, 2013; Sangrigoli, Pallier, Argenti, Ventureyra & de

Schonen, 2006).

There are two solidified theories on the process that causes an ORB. One theory is

perceptual expertise which is an individual’s facial perceptual processing system has, over time,

built an expertise and is tailored to the race its most constantly exposed to (Anzures, Quinn,

Pascalis, Slater, & Lee, 2013; Hehman, Mania, & Gaertner, 2010; Kloth, Shields, & Rhodes,

2014). This theory is supported by growing evidence of a reversed or nonexistent ORB in

children adopted by another race. A study examined the effects of adoption on the ORB by

examining Korean adults who at age 3 had been adopted by Caucasian families. Their results

indicated that the Korean subjects were more accurate in recognizing Caucasian faces than Asian

faces (Sangrigoli, Pallier, Argenti, Ventureyra & de Schonen, 2006). Another supported theory is

sociocognitive theory that states that the ORB is a result of a reduced social interest and therefore

shallow processing of another race face. Social interest is connected to the categorization process

that individuals initiate to determine if someone is a part of their in-group or their out-group.

Evidence indicates own-race faces are seen in a holistic manner compared to other-race faces.
 3
LOOKING AT RACE: EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEASURES OF OWN-RACE BIAS

This social interest may be initiated due to specific features of an individual’s face that are

associated with different races (Anzures, Quinn, Pascalis, Slater, & Lee, 2013; Hehman, Mania, &

Gaertner, 2010; Kloth, Shields, & Rhodes, 2014; Wu, Laeng, & Magnussen, 2012). Anzures et al.

(2013), suggests that the ORB may initially be due to perceptual expertise until infants learn the

cultural norms and social categorization which perhaps strengthens or carries the ORB into

adulthood.

In an attempt to study the sociocognitive aspects behind the ORB, research that utilizes in-

group and out-group categorization as a paradigm to identify memory for faces. Hehman et al.

(2010) utilized this in-group and out-group categorization within their study by determining if the

addition of another in-group, university affiliation, effected the ORB. Memory for black and

Caucasian faces was analyzed by categorization which was either by race or by university

affiliation. The results indicated that the ORB was eliminated within the university categorization,

demonstrating that the addition of another in-group could “cancel out” the ORB. In an attempt to

replicate Hehman et al. (2010), Kloth et al. (2014) conducted a similar study researching the

impact of an additional in-group, university affiliation, on the ORB. Some differences within their

study was the addition of hooded faces as stimuli to eradicate the possibility of hair or clothing as

memory cues, as well as, the use of both Asian and Caucasian individuals as subjects compared to

only Caucasian subjects in Hehman et al. (2010). According to Kloth et al. (2014) study’s data

there was no evidence of an elimination of the ORB in any categorization including university

which does not support the data of Hehman et al. (2010). The researchers hypothesized that this

could be due to the location where the studies occurred; Kloth et. al (2014) took place in Australia

where there is much less university affiliation compared to the US where Hehman et al. (2010)

took place. Another factor could be the differences in their methodology.

 4
LOOKING AT RACE: EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEASURES OF OWN-RACE BIAS

Wu et al. (2012) examined the effect of eye-tracking and pupilometry to examine the ORB

through different eye-patterns. The results indicate a difference in eye movement during encoding

between own-race faces and other-race faces, more active scanning for own-race faces, and larger

pupil dilation for other-race faces. The methodology of eye-tracking can be used to examine the

sociocognitive effort and cultural norms involved in the ORB.

With the research surrounding the ORB and sociocognitive theory, the proposed study is

an attempt to replicate Hehman et al. (2010) results with changes to methodology. Our goal is to

examine if an own-race bias exists within the sample size studied and then determine if

association to another in-group (university/college) will affect the memory and attention of own-

race and other-race faces. We also hope to utilize eye-tracking to analyze eye movement and the

IAT to compare IAT scores to the ORB.

Methods

Participants

Sixty-four participants (32 who identify as black, and 32 who identify as Caucasian) will

be recruited through Loras College. Most participants will be recruited through the Introductory

Psychology Research Pool at Loras College. Participants will be restricted to those who identify

either as black or Caucasian in the demographic questions following the informed consent. This

limitation is necessary to analyze the ORB.

Stimuli

A total of 64 faces (32 black, 32 Caucasian) will be used as stimuli for the experiment. All

faces will be obtained through a face database and will be unknown to the participants. All faces

will have a neutral expression and direct gaze. Images of faces will be converted to black and
 5
LOOKING AT RACE: EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEASURES OF OWN-RACE BIAS

white and faces will be hooded to eliminate visual cues (hair, clothes, etc.). Each face will have an

identifying university association below and this assignment will not change throughout the

experiment.

During the study phase, 32 faces (16 black, 16 Caucasian) will be presented and grouped

by condition (university or race). There will be two groups, each condition, of four faces per trial

and eight trials total. A study time of 8 seconds per face will be allotted.

During the recognition phase, 64 faces will be presented (32 black, 32 Caucasian) and 32

faces would be “old” faces from the study phase. Faces will be presented individually and appear

until participant chooses “old” or “new” categorization for the face.

Apparatus

Stimuli presented on a Lenovo A485 ThinkPad laptop and answers were also recorded on

the laptop.

During both the learning and recognition phases an EyeTribe eye-tracking device will be

utilized to collect eye-tracking data.

Procedure

The experiment includes a study phase followed by a recognition phase. Within the

learning phase participants will be asked to memorize 32 faces split between four trials of each

condition and conditions will be counterbalanced. There will be 8 seconds per face for

memorization.

Between the study phase and the recognition phase, as a distractor phase, participants will

be asked to unscramble anagrams for six minutes.

 6
LOOKING AT RACE: EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEASURES OF OWN-RACE BIAS

Following the distractor phase the recognition phase will occur. In the recognition phase

participants will be asked to recall if the face presented is an “old” face (from the study phase) or

a “new” face (not from the study phase). A total of 64 faces will be presented individually with 32

from the study phase. This part of the experiment will be untimed.

Next participants will be asked to take an IAT test to analyze if any correlations occur

between an IAT score and the ORB. This test will be untimed.
 7
LOOKING AT RACE: EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT MEASURES OF OWN-RACE BIAS

References

Anzures, G., Quinn, P. C., Pascalis, O., Slater, A. M., & Lee, K. (2013). Development of

own-race biases. Visual Cognition, 21(9-10), 1165–1182.

Hehman, E., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2010). Where the division lies: Common ingroup

identity moderates the cross-race facial-recognition effect. Journal of Experimental Social

Psychology, 46(2), 445–448.

Kloth, N., Shields, S. E., & Rhodes, G. (2014). On the other side of the fence: Effects of social

categorization and spatial grouping on memory and attention for own-race and other-race

faces. PLoS ONE, 9(9), e105979.

Sangrigoli, S., Pallier, C., Argenti, A. M., Ventureyra, V. A. G., & de Schonen, S. (2005).

Reversibility of the other-race effect in face recognition during childhood. Psychological

Science, 16(6), 440-444.

Wu, E. X. W., Laeng, B., & Magnussen, S. (2012). Through the eyes of the own-race bias: Eye-

tracking and pupillometry during face recognition. Social Neuroscience, 7(2), 202–216.