Wan Lulu, Crookes Kate, Reynolds Katherine J, Irons Jessica L, McKone Elinor
Research School of Psychology, The Australian National University, Australia; ARC Centre for Excellence in Cognition and Its Disorders, The Australian National University, Australia.
School of Psychology and ARC Centre for Excellence in Cognition and Its Disorders, University of Western Australia, Australia.
Cognition. 2015 Nov;144:91-115. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.07.011. Epub 2015 Aug 7.
Competing approaches to the other-race effect (ORE) see its primary cause as either a lack of motivation to individuate social outgroup members, or a lack of perceptual experience with other-race faces. Here, we argue that the evidence supporting the social-motivational approach derives from a particular cultural setting: a high socio-economic status group (typically US Whites) looking at the faces of a lower status group (US Blacks) with whom observers typically have at least moderate perceptual experience. In contrast, we test motivation-to-individuate instructions across five studies covering an extremely wide range of perceptual experience, in a cultural setting of more equal socio-economic status, namely Asian and Caucasian participants (N = 480) tested on Asian and Caucasian faces. We find no social-motivational component at all to the ORE, specifically: no reduction in the ORE with motivation instructions, including for novel images of the faces, and at all experience levels; no increase in correlation between own- and other-race face recognition, implying no increase in shared processes; and greater (not the predicted less) effort applied to distinguishing other-race faces than own-race faces under normal ("no instructions") conditions. Instead, the ORE was predicted by level of contact with the other-race. Our results reject both pure social-motivational theories and also the recent Categorization-Individuation model of Hugenberg, Young, Bernstein, and Sacco (2010). We propose a new dual-route approach to the ORE, in which there are two causes of the ORE-lack of motivation, and lack of experience--that contribute differently across varying world locations and cultural settings.
关于异族效应(ORE)的不同解释认为,其主要原因要么是缺乏区分社会外群体成员的动机,要么是缺乏对异族面孔的感知经验。在此,我们认为,支持社会动机方法的证据源自一种特定的文化背景:一个社会经济地位较高的群体(通常是美国白人)观察一个地位较低群体(美国黑人)的面孔,观察者通常与该群体至少有一定程度的感知经验。相比之下,我们在五项研究中测试了区分动机指令,这些研究涵盖了极其广泛的感知经验范围,研究背景是社会经济地位更为平等的文化环境,即对亚洲和高加索参与者(N = 480)进行亚洲和高加索面孔的测试。我们发现,异族效应根本不存在社会动机成分,具体而言:动机指令下异族效应没有降低,包括对于面孔的新图像以及在所有经验水平上;本族和异族面孔识别之间的相关性没有增加,这意味着共享过程没有增加;在正常(“无指令”)条件下,区分异族面孔比区分本族面孔付出的努力更多(而非预测的更少)。相反,异族效应是由与异族的接触程度预测的。我们的结果既否定了纯粹的社会动机理论,也否定了最近由胡根伯格、杨、伯恩斯坦和萨科(2010年)提出的分类 - 个体化模型。我们提出了一种关于异族效应的新的双路径方法,其中异族效应有两个原因——缺乏动机和缺乏经验——它们在不同的世界地点和文化背景下发挥不同的作用。