(Eye-) Tracking the Other-Race Effect: Comparison of Eye Movements During Encoding and Recognition of Ingroup Faces With Proximal and Distant Outgroup Faces

Abstract

People experience difficulties recognizing faces of ethnic outgroups, known as the other-race effect. The present eye-tracking study investigates if this effect is related to differences in visual attention to ingroup and outgroup faces. We measured gaze fixations to specific facial features and overall eye-movement activity level during an old/new recognition task comparing ingroup faces with proximal and distal ethnic outgroup faces. Recognition was best for ingroup faces and decreased gradually for proximal and distal outgroup faces. Participants attended more to the eyes of ingroup faces than outgroup faces, but this effect was unrelated to recognition performance. Ingroup-outgroup differences in eye-movement activity level did not emerge during the study phase, but during the recognition phase, with ingroup-outgroup differences varying as a function of recognition accuracy and old/new effects. Overall, ingroup-outgroup effects on recognition performance and eye movements were more pronounced for recognition of new items, emphasizing the role of retrieval processes.

Perceiving ingroup and outgroup faces within and across nations

“…Alternatively, because outgroup targets are less likely to be relevant enough to motivate individuation (Fiske & Neuberg, 1990), they propose that people will focus on shared categorical features when processing outgroups. In accordance with this theorizing, Kawakami and colleagues (Friesen, Kawakami, Vingilis‐Jaremko, et al, 2019; Kawakami et al, 2014) found that White perceivers attend more to the eyes of White ingroup compared to Black outgroup targets (see also Arizpe et al, 2016; Burgund, 2021; Stelter et al, 2021; Wheeler et al, 2011; but see Hills & Pake, 2013; McDonnell et al, 2014). This preference for ingroup eyes has also been found for White ingroup and Asian outgroup targets (Arizpe et al, 2016; Brielmann et al, 2014; Wu et al, 2012; but see Burgund, 2021; Caldara et al, 2010).…”

“…While our brief review provides some evidence for both experience and motivation as explanations for differences in processing ingroup and outgroup faces, such as the ORE and biases in emotion identification, it is clear that this support is neither strong nor consistent (Stelter et al, 2021). Given that these mechanisms may work alone or in conjunction to predict certain face processes, recent theories have attempted to integrate these mechanisms into a single framework Tüttenberg & Wiese, 2019).…”

“…Research has also recently demonstrated that racial differences in emotion identification may be related to preferential attention to the eyes of ingroup compared to outgroup members. Specifically, Friesen, Kawakami, Vingilis‐Jaremko, et al, (2019) proposed that because happiness expressions associated with true and false smiles are distinguishable for the most part by Duchenne markers and action units around the eyes and because it has been found that White participants attend more to the eyes of White than Black targets (Kawakami et al, 2014; Stelter et al, 2021), participants would be better at differentiating between these two expressions on White than Black faces. Six studies confirmed these hypotheses by demonstrating racial biases in the identification of true and false smiles and highlighting differences in visual attention as a mechanism for this effect.…”

“…Research on adults in Western contexts provides further evidence that participants attend more to the eyes of racial ingroups than outgroups, but to the nose and mouths of racial outgroups than ingroups (Kawakami et al, 2017; Stelter et al, 2021). By contrast, adults in Eastern contexts attend more to the nose and mouth of Asian ingroups than White outgroups, but to the eyes of White outgroups than Asian ingroups (Fu et al, 2012; Hu et al, 2014).…”

Impact of similarity on recognition of faces of Black and White targets

“…Likewise, Black participants showed better recognition for White than East Asian faces. Stelter et al (2021) further found that majority participants differentiated between outgroups that constituted relatively large and small minority populations in their environment. Specifically, White participants in Germany showed better recognition of Middle Eastern targets (a relatively large minority group) compared to Black or Asian targets (relatively small minority groups).…”