OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Behavior research methods
02, 2021;53 (1): 371-389.

Broadening the stimulus set: Introducing the American Multiracial Faces Database.

Jacqueline M Chen, Jasmine B Norman, Yeseul Nam
Author Information
  1. Jacqueline M Chen: Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. Jacqueline.chen@psych.utah.edu.
  2. Jasmine B Norman: Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
  3. Yeseul Nam: Department of Psychology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
PMID: 32705658 DOI: 10.3758/s13428-020-01447-8

Abstract

Face-based perceptions form the basis for how people behave towards each other and, hence, are central to understanding human interaction. Studying face perception requires a large and diverse set of stimuli in order to make ecologically valid, generalizable conclusions. To date, there are no publicly available databases with a substantial number of Multiracial or racially ambiguous faces. Our systematic review of the literature on Multiracial person perception documented that published studies have relied on computer-generated faces (84% of stimuli), Black-White faces (74%), and male faces (63%). We sought to address these issues, and to broaden the diversity of available face stimuli, by creating the American Multiracial Faces Database (AMFD). The AMFD is a novel collection of 110 faces with mixed-race heritage and accompanying ratings of those faces by naive observers that are freely available to academic researchers. The faces (smiling and neutral expression poses) were rated on attractiveness, emotional expression, racial ambiguity, masculinity, racial group membership(s), gender group membership(s), warmth, competence, dominance, and trustworthiness. The large majority of the AMFD faces are racially ambiguous and can pass into at least two different racial categories. These faces will be useful to researchers seeking to study Multiracial person perception as well as those looking for racially ambiguous faces in order to study categorization processes in general. Consequently, the AMFD will be useful to a broad group of researchers who are studying face perception.

Keywords

Face perception Face stimuli Impression formation Mixed-race Multiracial

References

  1. Bailey, A. H., LaFrance, M., & Dovidio, J. F. (2019). Is man the measure of all things? A social cognitive account of androcentrism. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 23(4), 307-331. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868318782848 [DOI: 10.1177/1088868318782848]
  2. Balas, B., & Pacella, J. (2015). Artificial faces are harder to remember. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 331-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.018 [DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.018]
  3. Balas, B., & Thrash, J. (2019). Using social face-space to estimate social variables in real and artificial faces. Unpublished manuscript. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/btv84
  4. Balas, B., Tupa, L., & Pacella, J. (2018). Measuring social variables in real and artificial faces. Computers in Human Behavior, 88, 236-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.013 [DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.013]
  5. Brewer, M. B. (1998). A dual process model of impression formation. In T.K Srull, & R.S Wyer (Eds.), Advances in Social Cognition (pp. 1-36). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  6. Carpinella, C. M., Chen, J. M., Hamilton, D. L., & Johnson, K. L. (2015). Gendered facial cues influence race categorizations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(3), 405-419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214567153 [DOI: 10.1177/0146167214567153]
  7. Chen, J. M. (2019). An integrative review of impression formation processes for Multiracial individuals. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(1), e12430. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12430 [DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12430]
  8. Chen, J.M., Fine, A.D., Norman, J.B., Frick, P.J., & Cauffman, E. (2020). Out of the picture: Male youths’ facial features predict their juvenile justice system processing outcomes. Manuscript submitted for publication.
  9. Chen, J. M., & Hamilton, D. L. (2012). Natural ambiguities: Racial categorization of multiracial individuals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 152-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.005 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.005]
  10. Chen, J. M., Kteily, N. S., & Ho, A. K. (2019). Whose side are you on? Asian Americans’ mistrust of Asian–White biracials predicts more exclusion from the ingroup. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(6), 827-841. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218798032 [DOI: 10.1177/0146167218798032]
  11. Chen, J. M., Moons, W. G., Gaither, S. E., Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, J. W. (2014). Motivation to control prejudice predicts categorization of multiracials. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(5), 590-603. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213520457 [DOI: 10.1177/0146167213520457]
  12. Chen, J. M., Pauker, K., Gaither, S. E., Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, J. W. (2018). Black + White = Not White: A minority bias in categorizations of Black-White multiracials. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 78, 43-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.05.002 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.05.002]
  13. Chen, J. M., & Ratliff, K. A. (2015). Implicit attitude generalization from Black to Black–White biracial group members. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(5), 544-550. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550614567686 [DOI: 10.1177/1948550614567686]
  14. Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64(3), 170-180. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014564 [DOI: 10.1037/a0014564]
  15. Cooley, E., Brown-Iannuzzi, J. L., Brown, C. S., & Polikoff, J. (2018). Black groups accentuate hypodescent by activating threats to the racial hierarchy. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(4), 411-418. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617708014 [DOI: 10.1177/1948550617708014]
  16. Dickter, C. L., & Kittel, J. A. (2012). The effect of stereotypical primes on the neural processing of racially ambiguous faces. Social Neuroscience, 7(6), 622-631. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2012.690345 [DOI: 10.1080/17470919.2012.690345]
  17. Disguised Face Database. (2017). https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~dfaced/index.html
  18. Dunham, Y., & Olson, K. R. (2016). Beyond discrete categories: Studying multiracial, intersex, and transgender children will strengthen basic developmental science. Journal of Cognition and Development, 17(4), 642-665. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2016.1195388 [DOI: 10.1080/15248372.2016.1195388]
  19. Eberhardt, J. L., Davies, P. G., Purdie-Vaughns, V. J., & Johnson, S. L. (2006). Looking deathworthy: Perceived stereotypicality of Black defendants predicts capital-sentencing outcomes. Psychological Science, 17(5), 383-386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01716.x [DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01716.x]
  20. Evolved Person Perception and Cognition Lab. (n.d.). Face Stimuli (mostly). Retrieved May 2020 from http://www.epaclab.com/face-stimuli
  21. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878-902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878 [DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878]
  22. Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 1-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60317-2 [DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60317-2]
  23. Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychological Review, 118(2), 247-279. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022327 [DOI: 10.1037/a0022327]
  24. Freeman, J. B., Pauker, K., & Sanchez, D. T. (2016). A perceptual pathway to bias: Interracial exposure reduces abrupt shifts in real-time race perception that predict mixed-race bias. Psychological Science, 27(4), 502-517. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615627418 [DOI: 10.1177/0956797615627418]
  25. French, A. R., Franz, T. M., Phelan, L. L., & Blaine, B. E. (2013). Reducing Muslim/Arab stereotypes through evaluative conditioning. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153(1), 6-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2012.706242 [DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2012.706242]
  26. Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., & Samuel, G. (2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Psychology Press.
  27. Gaither, S. E., Babbitt, L. G., & Sommers, S. R. (2018a). Resolving racial ambiguity in social interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 259-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.03.003 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.03.003]
  28. Gaither, S. E., Chen, J. M., Pauker, K., & Sommers, S. R. (2018b). At face value: Psychological outcomes differ for real vs. computer-generated Multiracial faces. The Journal of social psychology, 159(5), 592-610. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2018.1538929 [DOI: 10.1080/00224545.2018.1538929]
  29. Gaither, S. E., Pauker, K., Slepian, M. L., & Sommers, S. R. (2016). Social belonging motivates categorization of racially ambiguous faces. Social Cognition, 34(2), 97-118. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2016.34.2.97 [DOI: 10.1521/soco.2016.34.2.97]
  30. Gaither, S. E., Schultz, J. R., Pauker, K., Sommers, S. R., Maddox, K. B., & Ambady, N. (2014). Essentialist thinking predicts decrements in children’s memory for racially ambiguous faces. Developmental Psychology, 50(2), 482-488. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033493 [DOI: 10.1037/a0033493]
  31. Gaither, S. E., Toosi, N. R., Babbitt, L. G., & Sommers, S. R. (2019). Exposure to biracial faces reduces colorblindness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(1), 54-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218778012 [DOI: 10.1177/0146167218778012]
  32. Garay, M. M., Meyers, C., Remedios, J. D., & Pauker, K. (2019). Looking like vs. acting like your race: Social activism shapes perceptions of Multiracial individuals. Self and Identity, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2019.1659848
  33. Ghavami, N., & Peplau, L. A. (2013). An intersectional analysis of gender and ethnic stereotypes: Testing three hypotheses. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(1), 113-127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684312464203 [DOI: 10.1177/0361684312464203]
  34. Goff, P. A., Thomas, M. A., & Jackson, M. C. (2008). “Ain’t I a woman?”: Towards an intersectional approach to person perception and group-based harms. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 392-403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9505-4 [DOI: 10.1007/s11199-008-9505-4]
  35. Grgic, M., & Delac, K. (2019). Face Recognition Databases. https://www.face-rec.org/databases/
  36. Gunaydin, G., Selcuk, E., & Zayas, V. (2017). Impressions based on a portrait predict, 1-month later, impressions following a live interaction. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(1), 36-44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616662123 [DOI: 10.1177/1948550616662123]
  37. Halberstadt, J., Sherman, S. J., & Sherman, J. W. (2011). Why Barack Obama is Black: A cognitive account of hypodescent. Psychological Science, 22(1), 29-33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610390383 [DOI: 10.1177/0956797610390383]
  38. Halberstadt, J., & Winkielman, P. (2014). Easy on the eyes, or hard to categorize: Classification difficulty decreases the appeal of facial blends. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 175-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.08.004 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.08.004]
  39. Hehman, E., Sutherland, C. A., Flake, J. K., & Slepian, M. L. (2017). The unique contributions of perceiver and target characteristics in person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(4), 513-529. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000090 [DOI: 10.1037/pspa0000090]
  40. Hehman, E., Xie, S. Y., Ofosu, E. K., & Nespoli, G. A. (2018). Assessing the point at which averages are stable: A tool illustrated in the context of person perception. Unpublished manuscript. 10.31234/osf.io/2n6jq
  41. Herman, M. R. (2010). Do you see what I am? How observers’ backgrounds affect their perceptions of Multiracial faces. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73(1), 58-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272510361436 [DOI: 10.1177/0190272510361436]
  42. Hinzman, L., & Kelly, S. D. (2013). Effects of emotional body language on rapid out-group judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(1), 152-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.07.010 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.07.010]
  43. Ho, A. K., Kteily, N. S., & Chen, J. M. (2020). Introducing the sociopolitical motive × intergroup threat model to understand how monoracial perceivers’ sociopolitical motives influence their categorization of multiracial people. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868320917051 .
  44. Ho, A. K., Roberts, S. O., & Gelman, S. A. (2015). Essentialism and racial bias jointly contribute to the categorization of multiracial individuals. Psychological Science, 26(10), 1639-1645. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615596436 [DOI: 10.1177/0956797615596436]
  45. Ho, A. K., Sidanius, J., Levin, D. T., & Banaji, M. R. (2011). Evidence for hypodescent and racial hierarchy in the categorization and perception of biracial individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(3), 492. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021562 [DOI: 10.1037/a0021562]
  46. Hugenberg, K., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2004). Ambiguity in social categorization: The role of prejudice and facial affect in race categorization. Psychological Science, 15(5), 342-345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00680.x [DOI: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00680.x]
  47. Hutchings, P. B., & Haddock, G. (2008). Look Black in anger: The role of implicit prejudice in the categorization and perceived emotional intensity of racially ambiguous faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1418-1420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.05.002 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.05.002]
  48. Ito, T. A., Willadsen-Jensen, E. C., Kaye, J. T., & Park, B. (2011). Contextual variation in automatic evaluative bias to racially-ambiguous faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(4), 818-823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.02.016 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.02.016]
  49. Jaeger, B., Evans, A. M., Stel, M., & van Beest, I. (2019). Explaining the persistent influence of facial cues in social decision-making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(6), 1008–1021. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000591 [DOI: 10.1037/xge0000591]
  50. Jimeno-Ingrum, D., Berdahl, J. L., & Lucero-Wagoner, B. (2009). Stereotypes of Latinos and Whites: Do they guide evaluations in diverse work groups? Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15(2), 158–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015508 [DOI: 10.1037/a0015508]
  51. Johnson, K. L., Freeman, J. B., & Pauker, K. (2012). Race is gendered: How covarying phenotypes and stereotypes bias sex categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102(1), 116-131. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025335 [DOI: 10.1037/a0025335]
  52. Jones, B., DeBruine, L., Flake, J., Aczel, B., Adamkovic, M., Alaei, R., … Chartier, C. R. (2019). To Which World Regions Does the Valence-Dominance Model of Social Perception Apply? Nature Human Behaviour.
  53. Kang, S. K., Plaks, J. E., & Remedios, J. D. (2015). Folk beliefs about genetic variation predict avoidance of biracial individuals. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(357), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00357 [DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00357]
  54. Kenny, D. A., & West, T. V. (2010). Similarity and agreement in self-and other perception: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14(2), 196-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309353414 [DOI: 10.1177/1088868309353414]
  55. Kinzler, K. D., & Dautel, J. B. (2012). Children’s essentialist reasoning about language and race. Developmental Science, 15(1), 131-138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01101.x [DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01101.x]
  56. Krosch, A. R., Berntsen, L., Amodio, D. M., Jost, J. T., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2013). On the ideology of hypodescent: Political conservatism predicts categorization of racially ambiguous faces as Black. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(6), 1196-1203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.05.009 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.05.009]
  57. Kteily, N., Cotterill, S., Sidanius, J., Sheehy-Skeffington, J., & Bergh, R. (2014). “Not one of us” predictors and consequences of denying ingroup characteristics to ambiguous targets. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(10), 1231-1247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214539708 [DOI: 10.1177/0146167214539708]
  58. Langner, O., Dotsch, R., Bijlstra, G., Wigboldus, D. H., Hawk, S. T., & Van Knippenberg, A. D. (2010). Presentation and validation of the Radboud Faces Database. Cognition and Emotion, 24(8), 1377-1388. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930903485076 [DOI: 10.1080/02699930903485076]
  59. Livingston, G. (2017 ). The rise of Multiracial and multiethnic babies in the U.S. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/06/the-rise-of-Multiracial-and-multiethnic-babies-in-the-u-s/
  60. LoBue, V., & Thrasher, C. (2015). The Child Affective Facial Expression (CAFE) set: Validity and reliability from untrained adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(1532). 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01532 [DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01532]
  61. Ma, D. S., Correll, J., & Wittenbrink, B. (2015). The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1122-1135. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5 [DOI: 10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5]
  62. Ma, D. S., Koltai, K., McManus, R. M., Bernhardt, A., Correll, J., & Wittenbrink, B. (2018). Race signaling features: Identifying markers of racial prototypicality among Asians, Blacks, Latinos, and Whites. Social Cognition, 36(6), 603-625. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2018.36.6.603 [DOI: 10.1521/soco.2018.36.6.603]
  63. MacLin, O. H., & Malpass, R. S. (2001). Racial categorization of faces: the ambiguous race face effect. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(1), 98-118. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.98 [DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.98]
  64. MacLin, O. H., & Malpass, R. S. (2003). The ambiguous-race face illusion. Perception, 32(2), 249-252. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5046 [DOI: 10.1068/p5046]
  65. Mattarozzi, K., Colonnello, V., De Gioia, F., & Todorov, A. (2017). I care, even after the first impression: Facial appearance-based evaluations in healthcare context. Social Science & Medicine, 182, 68-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.04.011 [DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.04.011]
  66. Miller, S. L., Maner, J. K., & Becker, D. V. (2010). Self-protective biases in group categorization: Threat cues shape the psychological boundary between “us” and “them”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(1), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018086 [DOI: 10.1037/a0018086]
  67. Minear, M., & Park, D. C. (2004). A lifespan database of adult facial stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 630-633. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206543 [DOI: 10.3758/BF03206543]
  68. Newton, V. A., Dickter, C. L., & Gyurovski, I. I. (2011). The effects of stereotypical cues on the social categorization and judgment of ambiguous-race targets. Journal of Interpersonal Relations, Intergroup Relations and Identity, 4, 31-45.
  69. Nicolas, G., Skinner, A. L., & Dickter, C. L. (2019). Other Than the Sum: Hispanic and Middle Eastern Categorizations of Black–White Mixed-Race Faces. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(4), 532-541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550618769591 [DOI: 10.1177/1948550618769591]
  70. Norman, J. B., & Chen, J. M. (2019). I am Multiracial: Predictors of Multiracial identification strength among mixed ancestry individuals. Self and Identity, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2019.1635522
  71. Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(32), 11087-11092. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0805664105 [DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0805664105]
  72. Parker, K., Horowitz, J. M., Morin, R., & Lopez, M. H. (2015). Multiracial in America: Proud, diverse and growing in Numbers. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/06/11/Multiracial-in-america/
  73. Pauker, K., & Ambady, N. (2009). Multiracial faces: How categorization affects memory at the boundaries of race. Journal of Social Issues, 65(1), 69-86. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01588.x [DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01588.x]
  74. Pauker, K., Ambady, N., & Freeman, J. B. (2013a). The power of identity to motivate face memory in biracial individuals. Social Cognition, 31(6), 780-791. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2013.31.6.780 [DOI: 10.1521/soco.2013.31.6.780]
  75. Pauker, K., Carpinella, C. M., Lick, D. J., Sanchez, D. T., & Johnson, K. L. (2018a). Malleability in biracial categorizations: The impact of geographic context and targets' racial heritage. Social Cognition, 36(5), 461-480. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2018.36.5.461 [DOI: 10.1521/soco.2018.36.5.461]
  76. Pauker, K., Johnson, K. L., & Ambady, N. (2013b). Race in the mirror: Situational cues and essentialist theories influence biracial individuals’ self-perception. Manuscript in preparation.
  77. Pauker, K., Meyers, C., Sanchez, D. T., Gaither, S. E., & Young, D. M. (2018b). A review of multiracial malleability: Identity, categorization, and shifting racial attitudes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12(6), e12392. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12392 [DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12392]
  78. Pauker, K., Weisbuch, M., Ambady, N., Sommers, S. R., Adams Jr, R. B., & Ivcevic, Z. (2009). Not so black and white: memory for ambiguous group members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4), 795-810. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013265 [DOI: 10.1037/a0013265]
  79. Peery, D., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (2008). Black+ White= Black: Hypodescent in reflexive categorization of racially ambiguous faces. Psychological Science, 19(10), 973-977. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02185.x [DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02185.x]
  80. Plaks, J. E., Malahy, L. W., Sedlins, M., & Shoda, Y. (2012). Folk beliefs about human genetic variation predict discrete versus continuous racial categorization and evaluative bias. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(1), 31-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550611408118 [DOI: 10.1177/1948550611408118]
  81. Purdie-Vaughns, V., & Eibach, R. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59, 377-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4 [DOI: 10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4]
  82. Roberts, S. O., & Gelman, S. A. (2015). Do children see in Black and White? Children's and adults' categorizations of multiracial individuals. Child Development, 86(6), 1830-1847. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12410 [DOI: 10.1111/cdev.12410]
  83. Roberts, S. O., & Gelman, S. A. (2017). Multiracial children’s and adults’ categorizations of multiracial individuals. Journal of Cognition and Development, 18(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2015.1086772 [DOI: 10.1080/15248372.2015.1086772]
  84. Roberts, S. O., Leonard, K. C., Ho, A. K., & Gelman, S. A. (2017a). Does this Smile Make me Look White? Exploring the Effects of Emotional Expressions on the Categorization of Multiracial Children. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 17(3-4), 218-231. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12340005 [DOI: 10.1163/15685373-12340005]
  85. Roberts, S. O., Williams, A. D., & Gelman, S. A. (2017b). Children’s and adults’ predictions of Black, White, and Multiracial friendship patterns. Journal of Cognition and Development, 18(2), 189-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2016.1262374 [DOI: 10.1080/15248372.2016.1262374]
  86. Rodeheffer, C. D., Hill, S. E., & Lord, C. G. (2012). Does this recession make me look black? The effect of resource scarcity on the categorization of biracial faces. Psychological Science, 23(12), 1476-1478. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612450892 [DOI: 10.1177/0956797612450892]
  87. Sanchez, D. T., & Chavez, G. (2010). Are you minority enough? Language ability affects targets' and perceivers' assessments of a candidate's appropriateness for affirmative action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32(1), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973530903435896 [DOI: 10.1080/01973530903435896]
  88. Sanchez, D. T., Chavez, G., Good, J. J., & Wilton, L. S. (2012). The language of acceptance: Spanish proficiency and perceived intragroup rejection among Latinos. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(6), 1019-1033. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022111416979 [DOI: 10.1177/0022022111416979]
  89. Sesko, A. K., & Biernat, M. (2010). Prototypes of race and gender: The invisibility of Black women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 356-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.10.016 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.10.016]
  90. Shutts, K., & Kinzler, K. D. (2007). An ambiguous-race illusion in children's face memory. Psychological Science, 18(9), 763-767. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01975.x [DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01975.x]
  91. Skinner, A. L., & Nicolas, G. (2015). Looking Black or looking back? Using phenotype and ancestry to make racial categorizations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 57, 55-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.11.011 [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2014.11.011]
  92. Small, P. A., & Major, B. (2019). Crossing the racial line: The fluidity vs. fixedness of racial identity. Self and Identity, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2019.1662839
  93. Stolier, R. M. (n.d.). FSTC: Face stimulus and tool collection. Retrieved May 2020, from https://rystoli.github.io/FSTC.html#stim
  94. Stroessner, S. J. (1996). Social categorization by race or sex: Effects of perceived non-normalcy on response times. Social Cognition, 14(3), 247-276. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1996.14.3.247 [DOI: 10.1521/soco.1996.14.3.247]
  95. Strohminger, N., Gray, K., Chituc, V., Heffner, J., Schein, C., & Heagins, T. B. (2016). The MR2: A multi-racial, mega-resolution database of facial stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, 48(3), 1197-1204. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0641-9 [DOI: 10.3758/s13428-015-0641-9]
  96. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of group conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
  97. Thorstenson, C. A., Pazda, A. D., Young, S. G., & Slepian, M. L. (2019). Incidental Cues to Threat and Racial Categorization. Social Cognition, 37(4), 389-404. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2019.37.4.389 [DOI: 10.1521/soco.2019.37.4.389]
  98. Todorov, A., Said, C. P., Engell, A. D., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2008). Understanding evaluation of faces on social dimensions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(12), 455-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2008.10.001 [DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.10.001]
  99. Willadsen-Jensen, E., & Ito, T. A. (2015). The effect of context on responses to racially ambiguous faces: changes in perception and evaluation. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 10(7), 885-892. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsu134 [DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsu134]
  100. Willadsen-Jensen, E. C., & Ito, T. A. (2006). Ambiguity and the timecourse of racial perception. Social Cognition, 24(5), 580-606. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2006.24.5.580 [DOI: 10.1521/soco.2006.24.5.580]
  101. Willadsen-Jensen, E. C., & Ito, T. A. (2008). A foot in both worlds: Asian Americans' perceptions of Asian, White, and racially ambiguous faces. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 11(2), 182-200. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207088037 [DOI: 10.1177/1368430207088037]
  102. Williams, M. J., George-Jones, J., & Hebl, M. (2019). The face of STEM: Racial phenotypic stereotypicality predicts STEM persistence by—and ability attributions about—students of color. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(3), 416-443. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000153 [DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000153]
  103. Wilson, J. P., & Rule, N. O. (2015). Facial trustworthiness predicts extreme criminal-sentencing outcomes. Psychological Science, 26(8), 1325-1331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615590992 [DOI: 10.1177/0956797615590992]
  104. Wilson, J. P., & Rule, N. O. (2016). Hypothetical sentencing decisions are associated with actual capital punishment outcomes: The role of facial trustworthiness. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(4), 331-338. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615624142 [DOI: 10.1177/1948550615624142]
  105. Wilton, L., Sanchez, D. T., & Giamo, L. (2014). Seeing Similarity or Distance?: Racial Identification Moderates Intergroup Perception after Biracial Exposure. Social Psychology, 45, 127-134. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000168 [DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000168]
  106. Wilton, L. S., Rattan, A., & Sanchez, D. T. (2018). White’s perceptions of biracial individuals’ race shift when biracials speak out against bias. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 9(8), 953-961. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617731497 [DOI: 10.1177/1948550617731497]
  107. Wilton, L. S., Sanchez, D. T., & Chavez, G. F. (2013). Speaking the language of diversity: Spanish fluency, White ancestry, and skin color in the distribution of diversity awards to Latinos. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 35(4), 346-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2013.803969 [DOI: 10.1080/01973533.2013.803969]
  108. Xie, S. Y., Flake, J. K., & Hehman, E. (2019). Perceiver and target characteristics contribute to impression formation differently across race and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 117(2), 364-385. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000160 [DOI: 10.1037/pspi0000160]
  109. Young, D. M., Sanchez, D. T., & Wilton, L. S. (2013). At the crossroads of race: Racial ambiguity and biracial identification influence psychological essentialist thinking. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19(4), 461. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032565 [DOI: 10.1037/a0032565]
  110. Young, D. M., Sanchez, D. T., & Wilton, L. S. (2016). Too rich for diversity: Socioeconomic status influences multifaceted person perception of Latino targets. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 16(1), 392-416. https://doi.org/10.1111/asap.12104 [DOI: 10.1111/asap.12104]
  111. Young, D. M., Sanchez, D. T., & Wilton, L. S. (2017). Biracial perception in black and white: How Black and White perceivers respond to phenotype and racial identity cues. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 23(1), 154-164. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000103 [DOI: 10.1037/cdp0000103]

MeSH Term

Face
Facial Recognition
Humans
Male
Masculinity
Racial Groups
United States
White People
Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review
Article has an altmetric score of 10

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0facesMultiracialperceptionstimuliAMFDfaceavailableraciallyambiguousresearchersracialgrouplargeorderpersonAmericanFacesDatabaseexpressionmembershipswillusefulstudyFaceFace-basedperceptionsformbasispeoplebehavetowardshencecentralunderstandinghumaninteractionStudyingrequiresdiversesetmakeecologicallyvalidgeneralizableconclusionsdatepubliclydatabasessubstantialnumbersystematicreviewliteraturedocumentedpublishedstudiesreliedcomputer-generated84%Black-White74%male63%soughtaddressissuesbroadendiversitycreatingnovelcollection110mixed-raceheritageaccompanyingratingsnaiveobserversfreelyacademicsmilingneutralposesratedattractivenessemotionalambiguitymasculinitygenderwarmthcompetencedominancetrustworthinessmajoritycanpassleasttwodifferentcategoriesseekingwelllookingcategorizationprocessesgeneralConsequentlybroadstudyingBroadeningstimulusset:IntroducingImpressionformationMixed-race

Similar Articles

Cited By