Third, perceptual inferences based on experience may cause one dimension to cue for another as smiling does for familiarity ( Baudouin et al., 2000). own-race faces, indicating that experience affects not only the individual recognition of faces (as in the canonical other-race effect, Malpass and Kravitz, 1969), but a larger spectrum of face processing abilities. (1996) found that Asian and Caucasian observers made more mistakes when categorizing the gender of other-race vs. Second, the narrowing of one dimension ( Kelly et al., 2007) may affect the processing of another. First, they may be entirely stimulus-driven or based on the coding of conjunctions of dimensions at the level of single neurons ( Morin et al., 2014). Such interactions may have multiple origins, with some but not all requiring a certain amount of experience to develop. Structural encoding consists of the abstraction of an expression-independent representation of faces from pictorial encodings or “snapshots.” This results in the extraction of variant and invariant dimensions that are then processed in a hierarchical arrangement where invariant dimensions are of a higher order than the variant ones ( Bruce and Young, 1986).įacial dimensions, however, interact during social perception.
Models of face perception hypothesize an early separation of variant (gaze, expression, speech) and invariant (identity, gender, and race) dimensions of faces in a stage called structural encoding ( Bruce and Young, 1986 Haxby et al., 2000).
Taken together, the evidence suggests considerable stability in the interaction between some facial dimensions in social categorization that is present prior to the onset of formal schooling. Our findings are thus consistent with stimulus-and stereotyped-belief driven accounts of the angry-male bias. Based on several computational simulations of gender categorization (Experiment 3), we further conclude that (1) the angry-male bias results, at least partially, from a strategy of attending to facial features or their second-order relations when categorizing face gender, and (2) any single choice of computational representation (e.g., Principal Component Analysis) is insufficient to assess resemblances between face categories, as different representations of the very same faces suggest different bases for the angry-male bias. The developmental course of the angry-male bias, along with its extension to other-race faces, combine to suggest that it is not rooted in extensive experience, e.g., observing males engaging in aggressive acts during the school years. The bias is observed for both own- and other-race faces, and is remarkably unchanged across development (into adulthood) as revealed by signal detection analyses (Experiments 1–2). Here we report that anger biases face gender categorization toward “male” responding in children as young as 5–6 years. However, the developmental course and underlying mechanism (bottom-up stimulus driven or top-down belief driven) associated with the angry-male bias remain unclear.
6Department of Psychology, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, CanadaĪngry faces are perceived as more masculine by adults.5Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.Eric Jackman Institute of Child Study, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada 3Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA.2Laboratoire de Psychologie et Neurocognition, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Grenoble, France.1Laboratoire de Psychologie et Neurocognition, University of Grenoble-Alps, Grenoble, France.Quinn 3, Kang Lee 4, Édouard Gentaz 1,2,5 and James W. Laurie Bayet 1,2 *, Olivier Pascalis 1,2, Paul C.
0 kommentar(er)
