Appearance-based inferences bias source memory

Abstract

Previous research varying the trustworthiness of appearance has demonstrated that facial characteristics contribute to source memory. Two studies extended this work by investigating the contribution to source memory of babyfaceness, a facial quality known to elicit strong spontaneous trait inferences. Young adult participants viewed younger and older babyfaced and mature-faced individuals paired with sentences that were either congruent or incongruent with the target's facial characteristics. Identifying a source as dominant or submissive was least accurate when participants chose between a target whose behavior was incongruent with facial characteristics and a lure whose face mismatched the target in appearance, but matched the source memory question. In Study 1, this effect held true when identifying older sources, but not own-age, younger sources. When task difficulty was increased in Study 2, the relationship between face-behavior congruence and lure facial characteristics persisted, but it was not moderated by target age even though participants continued to correctly identify fewer older than younger sources. Taken together, these results indicate that trait expectations associated with variations in facial maturity can bias source memory for both own- and other-age faces, although own-age faces are less vulnerable to this bias, as shown in the moderation by task difficulty.

Appearance-based first impressions and person memory.

“…The analysis of the guessing parameter confirms previous re sults showing an influence of appearance-based inferences on person memory (Cassidy et al, 2012;Nash et al, 2010), but it may appear inconsistent with the predictions of probability matching theory. In particular, several studies of Bayen and colleagues Note.…”

Influences of appearance-behaviour congruity on memory and social judgements

“…First, Experiment 1 replicates work (e.g., Cassidy et al, 2012; Kleider et al, 2012; Nash et al, 2010) showing better memory for congruent over incongruent face-behavior pairs, while uniquely showing that congruent and incongruent pairs are better remembered than pairs with average faces. This suggests that even when appearance and behavioral cues conflict, they improve memory beyond when receiving less information.…”

“…Although faces were expressively neutral in prior source memory work involving appearance-behavior congruity (e.g., Cassidy et al, 2012), subjectively trustworthy or untrustworthy faces may provide more diagnostic information (Said et al, 2009) than faces falling between these categories.…”

“…Participants indicated their behavior-based impressions as positive or negative (Figure 1b). Memory was scored based on prior behavior categorizations as positive or negative, similar to other work (Cassidy et al, 2012; Nash et al, 2010). …”

“…Recent work (Cassidy, Zebrowitz, & Gutchess, 2012; Kleider, Cavrak, & Knuycky, 2012; Nash et al, 2010; Rule, Slepian, & Ambady, 2012; Suzuki & Suga, 2010) explored appearance-behavior congruity effects in memory. Creating congruent (e.g., trustworthy face/positive behavior) and incongruent (e.g., trustworthy face/negative behavior) face-behavior pairs can lead to memory biases for both congruent (e.g., Nash et al, 2010) and incongruent (e.g., Suzuki & Suga, 2010) information.…”