Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review

By Christian A. Meissner, John C. Brigham. 2001

1,676 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/315900b898f47295550a0edaf9ed8b4e5243ed6c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Perceptual learning: 12-month-olds' discrimination of monkey faces. (2012, background): “The ORE is defined as discriminating or recognizing faces within one’s own ethnicity but not showing this perceptual discrimination or recognition for faces of a different or unfamiliar ethnicity (see Meissner & Brigham, 2001, for a review).”
Social categorization and stereotyping: How social categorization biases person perception and face memory. (2008, background): “In now classic research, Sagar and Schofield (1980) showed Black and White children a variety of ambiguously aggressive behaviors performed by Black and White targets.”
We've got minorities, yes we do: visual representations of racial and ethnic diversity in college recruitment materials (2013, background): “For example, Michel, Rossion, Han, Chung, & Caldara (2006), as well as Meissner & Bringham (2001), have found that people are more accurate assessing same-race subjects than other-race subjects.”
Race-contingent aftereffects suggest distinct perceptual norms for different race faces (2008, background): “…2008, 16 (6), 734 753 # 2007 Psychology Press, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business http://www.psypress.com/viscog DOI: 10.1080/13506280701350647 Meissner & Brigham, 2001), one model that has been particularly influential is Valentine’s (1991) face-space framework.”
On the epistemic costs of implicit bias (2011, background): “Across hundreds of studies in dozens of cultures, psychologists have shown a tendency for participants to exhibit superior recognitional capacities for own-race as compared to other-race faces (cf. Meissner and Brigham 2001).”
Sex differences and the own-gender bias in face recognition: A meta-analytic review (2013, background): “…95% CI [.44, .70]) than the own-race bias (g 0.82, 95% CI [.78, .85]; Meissner & Brigham, 2001), and, whereas the own-race bias typically is displayed by most groups (Meissner & Brigham, 2001), we show that the own-gender bias is asymmetrical as only one group (i.e., females) displays the effect.”
Social Categorization and the Perception of Social Groups (2012, result): “…less well than same-race faces, suggesting that the ambiguous faces were treated as if they belonged in the out-group, in accordance with the well-established own-race bias (e.g., Malpass & Kravitz, 1969; Meissner & Brigham, 2001; see Hugenberg, Young, Bernstein, & Sacco, 2010, for a review).”
Culture Shapes How We Look at Faces (2008, background): “Therefore, the question of whether information used for face recognition is modulated by the race of the input faces is long standing within the cross-cultural face literature [17].”
The composite face illusion: A whole window into our understanding of holistic face perception (2013, neutral): “…faces of a nonexperienced morphology, such as ‘‘other-race’’ or ‘‘other-age’’ faces, are also both less well recognized (e.g., Malpass & Kravitz, 1969; Meissner & Brigham, 2001) and processed less holistically (e.g., Michel, Rossion, et al., 2006; Tanaka, Kiefer, & Bukach, 2004; see, for a…”