Suppr超能文献

观察自己种族和其他种族面孔的差异很细微且依赖于分析方法:对不同报告的一种解释

Differences in Looking at Own- and Other-Race Faces Are Subtle and Analysis-Dependent: An Account of Discrepant Reports.

作者信息

Arizpe Joseph, Kravitz Dwight J, Walsh Vincent, Yovel Galit, Baker Chris I

机构信息

Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America.

Applied Cognitive Neuroscience Group, Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2016 Feb 5;11(2):e0148253. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148253. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

The Other-Race Effect (ORE) is the robust and well-established finding that people are generally poorer at facial recognition of individuals of another race than of their own race. Over the past four decades, much research has focused on the ORE because understanding this phenomenon is expected to elucidate fundamental face processing mechanisms and the influence of experience on such mechanisms. Several recent studies of the ORE in which the eye-movements of participants viewing own- and other-race faces were tracked have, however, reported highly conflicting results regarding the presence or absence of differential patterns of eye-movements to own- versus other-race faces. This discrepancy, of course, leads to conflicting theoretical interpretations of the perceptual basis for the ORE. Here we investigate fixation patterns to own- versus other-race (African and Chinese) faces for Caucasian participants using different analysis methods. While we detect statistically significant, though subtle, differences in fixation pattern using an Area of Interest (AOI) approach, we fail to detect significant differences when applying a spatial density map approach. Though there were no significant differences in the spatial density maps, the qualitative patterns matched the results from the AOI analyses reflecting how, in certain contexts, Area of Interest (AOI) analyses can be more sensitive in detecting the differential fixation patterns than spatial density analyses, due to spatial pooling of data with AOIs. AOI analyses, however, also come with the limitation of requiring a priori specification. These findings provide evidence that the conflicting reports in the prior literature may be at least partially accounted for by the differences in the statistical sensitivity associated with the different analysis methods employed across studies. Overall, our results suggest that detection of differences in eye-movement patterns can be analysis-dependent and rests on the assumptions inherent in the given analysis.

摘要

异族效应(ORE)是一个得到充分证实且稳固的发现,即人们通常在识别其他种族个体的面部特征方面比识别自己种族的个体表现更差。在过去的四十年里,许多研究都聚焦于异族效应,因为人们期望通过理解这一现象来阐明基本的面部处理机制以及经验对这些机制的影响。然而,最近几项关于异族效应的研究追踪了参与者观看本族和其他种族面孔时的眼动情况,却报告了关于对本族和其他种族面孔的眼动差异模式是否存在的高度冲突的结果。这种差异当然导致了对异族效应感知基础的相互冲突的理论解释。在这里,我们使用不同的分析方法,研究了高加索参与者对本族和其他种族(非洲和中国)面孔的注视模式。虽然我们使用感兴趣区域(AOI)方法检测到注视模式存在统计学上显著但细微的差异,但在应用空间密度图方法时却未能检测到显著差异。尽管空间密度图中没有显著差异,但定性模式与AOI分析的结果相符,这反映出在某些情况下,由于AOI数据的空间合并,感兴趣区域(AOI)分析在检测差异注视模式方面可能比空间密度分析更敏感。然而,AOI分析也有需要先验指定的局限性。这些发现提供了证据,表明先前文献中的冲突报告可能至少部分是由于各研究中使用的不同分析方法所关联的统计敏感性差异造成的。总体而言,我们的结果表明,眼动模式差异的检测可能依赖于分析方法,并且取决于给定分析中固有的假设。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ef6b/4744017/f059830e5fee/pone.0148253.g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验