2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.08.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

No enhanced memory for faces of cheaters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

16
49
3

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 62 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
16
49
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Oddly, this result was not found for faces associated with high-status professions. More recent studies have been unable to replicate the Mealey et al finding (Barclay & Lalumière, 2006;Mehl & Buchner, 2008). This is not unexpected from a functional perspective on human memory, however, because just perceiving a face as familiar, without concurrent memory for the context in which a face was encountered, cannot be of help in avoiding cheaters and, thus, cannot provide an evolutionary benefit.…”
mentioning
confidence: 54%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Oddly, this result was not found for faces associated with high-status professions. More recent studies have been unable to replicate the Mealey et al finding (Barclay & Lalumière, 2006;Mehl & Buchner, 2008). This is not unexpected from a functional perspective on human memory, however, because just perceiving a face as familiar, without concurrent memory for the context in which a face was encountered, cannot be of help in avoiding cheaters and, thus, cannot provide an evolutionary benefit.…”
mentioning
confidence: 54%
“…A repeated measures MANOVA showed that behavioral history had large effects on the encoding phase likability ratings [see Table 1 (Buchner et al, 2009;Mehl & Buchner, 2008), despite the powerful effects of the descriptions on the encoding phase likability ratings, there was no effect of these descriptions on old-new discrimination.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The authors argued that this reflects an innate bias to remember cheaters, but especially those who we have the power to punish, namely those of lower status. Although one further experiment replicated these findings, showing that cheaters are both looked at longer and better remembered than non-cheaters (Chiappe, Brown, Dow, Koontz, Rodriguez, & McCulloch, 2004), subsequent research has failed to replicate them (Barclay & Lalumière, 2006;Mehl & Buchner, 2008). Other findings in this area have been inconsistent (Barclay, 2008;Bell & Buchner, 2010;Buchner, Bell, Mehl, & Musch, 2009).…”
Section: Memory For Cheatersmentioning
confidence: 64%