Inequality between biases in face memory: Event-related potentials reveal dissociable neural correlates of own-race and own-gender biases

Wiese, Holger; Schweinberger, Stefan R.

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2018.01.016

Cited by 35 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is larger for own-race faces in participants without particular expertise for other-race faces, but not in other-race face “experts” (Stahl, Wiese, & Schweinberger, 2008 ). Moreover, although a previous study observed this component to differentiate between later remembered and forgotten own-gender versus other-gender faces (Wolff et al, 2014 ), more recent studies have not found a correlate of gender processing in the occipito-temporal P2 (Wiese & Schweinberger, 2018 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 91%

Same-gender distractors are not so easy to reject: ERP evidence of gender categorization

Rakić

Steffens

Wiese

2018

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social categorization appears to be an automatic process that occurs during person perception. Understanding social categorization better is important because mere categorization can lead to stereotype activation and, in turn, to discrimination. In the present study we used a novel approach to examine event-related potentials (ERPs) of gender categorization in the “Who said what?” memory paradigm, thus allowing for a more in-depth understanding of the specific mechanisms underlying identity versus categorization processing. After observing video clips showing a “discussion” among female and male targets, participants were shown individual statements, each accompanied by one of the discussants’ faces. While we measured ERPs, participants had to decide whether or not a given statement had previously been made by the person with the accompanying face. In same-person trials, statements were paired with the correct person, whereas in the distractor trials, either a same-gender or a different-gender distractor was shown. As expected, participants were able to reject different-gender distractors faster than same-gender distractors, and they were more likely to falsely choose yes for a same-gender than for a different-gender distractor. Both findings indicate gender-based categorization. ERPs, analyzed in a 300- to 400-ms time window at occipito-temporal channels, indicated more negative amplitudes for yes responses both for the same person and for same-gender distractors, relative to different-gender distractors. Overall, these results show gender-based categorization even when the task was to assess the identifying information in a gender-neutral context. These findings are interpreted as showing that gender categorization occurs automatically during person perception, but later than race- or age-based categorization.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 91%

Same-gender distractors are not so easy to reject: ERP evidence of gender categorization

Rakić

Steffens

Wiese

2018

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, a more pronounced early parietal ERP old/new effect (300–500 ms) was found for young Caucasian “in‐group” faces, and a more pronounced old/new effect in a later time window (500–800 ms) was found for own‐race faces. A more recent study documented a larger N170 response to other‐race faces, thought to reflect more effortful perceptual processing. In older adults, both low‐ and high‐memory performers demonstrated an own‐race bias and a parallel increase in N170 for other‐race faces, which was thought to reflect less efficient early perceptual processing.…”

Section: Race and Ethnicitymentioning

confidence: 95%

The importance of diversity in cognitive neuroscience

Dotson

Duarte

2019

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The vast majority of what is known about the neural underpinnings of human cognition comes from studies limited to racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically homogeneous samples. Furthermore, although most studies include both males and females in their samples, sex differences in patterns of brain activity and performance are rarely evaluated. We discuss recent research suggesting that one's socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and sex contribute to individual differences in neural structure, function, and related cognitive performance across a variety of cognitive domains. These studies make it clear that findings from decades of cognitive neuroscience research are likely not generalizable to a population that is much more diverse than the samples tested. We argue that these demographics cannot be ignored if we want to understand the neural substrates of human cognition for the diverse, general population. Cognitive neuroscience has been, and continues to be, used to inform education policy and clinical practice. We argue that greater diversity in cognitive neuroscience research is needed to improve reproducibility and to serve the treatment needs of a diverse population. We discuss the challenges to achieving this goal, including consideration of confounding and correlated variables, recruitment, necessary costs, and best practices for dealing with them.

show abstract

“…To this end, we investigated DF for own-and other-gender faces in female participants. The own-gender bias (for a review, see Herlitz & Loven, 2013) refers to better memory for own-than for other-gender faces and is often found to be reliable in female, but not in male, participants (e.g., Wiese & Schweinberger, 2018), although the exact pattern of results is not entirely consistent across studies (e.g., Steffens, Landmann, & Mecklenbräuker, 2013;Wolff, Kemter, Schweinberger, & Wiese, 2014;Wright & Sladden, 2003). The own-gender bias is mostly considered to be unrelated to expertise as most people in Western societies have similar contact with male and female faces (for an alternative developmental framework, see Herlitz & Loven, 2013).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intentionally remembering or forgetting own‐ and other‐race faces: Evidence from directed forgetting

Tüttenberg

Wiese

2019

British J of Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People are better at remembering faces of their own relative to another ethnic group. This socalled own-race bias (ORB) has been explained in terms of differential perceptual expertise for own-and other-race faces or, alternatively, as resulting from socio-cognitive factors. To directly test predictions derived from these accounts, we examined item-method directed forgetting (DF), a paradigm sensitive to an intentional modulation of memory, for faces belonging to different ethnic and social groups. In a series of five experiments, participants during learning received cues following each face to either remember or forget the item, but at test were required to recognise all items irrespective of instruction. In Experiments 1 and 5, Caucasian participants showed DF for own-race faces only while, in Experiment 2, East Asian participants with considerable expertise for Caucasian faces demonstrated DF for own-and other-race faces. Experiments 3 and 4 found clear DF for social in-and out-group faces. Contrary to recent socio-cognitive models of the ORB, our results suggest that a modulation of face memory by motivational processes is limited to faces with which we have acquired perceptual expertise. Thus, motivation alone is not sufficient to modulate memory for otherrace faces and cannot fully explain the ORB.

show abstract

Inequality between biases in face memory: Event-related potentials reveal dissociable neural correlates of own-race and own-gender biases

Cited by 35 publications

References 76 publications

Same-gender distractors are not so easy to reject: ERP evidence of gender categorization

Same-gender distractors are not so easy to reject: ERP evidence of gender categorization

The importance of diversity in cognitive neuroscience

Intentionally remembering or forgetting own‐ and other‐race faces: Evidence from directed forgetting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About