CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 84

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Other-Race Effect does not Rely on Memory: Evidence from a Matching Task

Megreya, Ahmed M., White, David, Burton, A. Mike·2011·Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
DOI 10.1080/17470218.2011.575228
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Viewers are typically better at remembering faces from their own race than from other races; however, it is not yet established whether this effect is due to memorial or perceptual processes. In this study, UK and Egyptian viewers were given a simultaneous face-matching task, in which the target faces were presented upright or upside down. As with previous research using face memory tasks, participants were worse at matching other-race faces than own-race faces and showed a stronger face inversion effect for own-race faces. However, subjects' performance on own and other-race faces was highly correlated. These data provide strong evidence that difficulty in perceptual encoding of unfamiliar faces contributes substantially to the other-race effect and that accounts based entirely on memory cannot capture the full data. Implications for forensic settings are also discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17470218.2011.575228

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An own-race bias is present in both face recognition and matching tasks.

    “evidence has shown that an own-race bias is present in both face recognition (Meissner & Brigham, 2001) and matching tasks (Megreya, White & Burton, 2011; Meissner, Susa & Ross, 2013)”

    From Unfamiliar face matching with photographs of infants and children (2018) · cites this paper as Megreya, White & Burton, 2011

  • Previous studies show poorer accuracy when matching faces that are of a different ethnicity to the viewer.

    “Previous studies show poorer accuracy when matching faces that are of a different ethnicity to the viewer [16].”

    From Error Rates in Users of Automatic Face Recognition Software (2015) · cites this paper as [16]

  • Subsequent studies replicated the finding of high error rates in unfamiliar face matching across a variety of stimulus sets and task formats.

    “Subsequent studies have replicated this basic finding across a variety of stimulus sets and task formats [13–16].”

    From Error Rates in Users of Automatic Face Recognition Software (2015) · cites this paper as [16]

  • The finding of higher accuracy for non-Caucasian targets is opposite to that reported in similar face matching studies, where other-race faces attract more matching errors than own-race faces.

    “This result is opposite to that reported in similar face matching studies, where other race faces attract more matching errors than own-race faces [16].”

    From Error Rates in Users of Automatic Face Recognition Software (2015) · cites this paper as [16]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. Bartlett J. C., 2003, Perception of faces, objects, and scenes: Analytical and holistic processes, 21
  2. 10.1023/A:1012840831846 · DOI
  3. 10.1177/0146167289151002 · DOI
  4. 10.1007/978-94-009-4420-6_17 · DOI
  5. Brigham J. C., 2007, The handbook of eyewitness psychology: Vol. II. Memory for people, 257
  6. 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1985.tb01133.x · DOI
  7. 10.1037/1076-898X.5.4.339 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.207 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Buckhout R., 1988, Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues: Vol. 1. Memory in everyday life, 40
  10. 10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00186-9 · DOI
  11. 10.3758/BRM.42.1.286 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.3758/BF03196628 · DOI
  13. Chance J. E., 1996, Psychological issues in eyewitness identification, 153
  14. 10.3758/BF03210319 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1037/0278-7393.21.6.1608 · DOI
  16. 10.1037/a0016548 · DOI
  17. 10.1348/000712607X199981 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.002 · DOI
  19. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00543.x · DOI
  20. 10.1002/acp.718 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199706)11:3<211::AID-ACP430>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI
  22. 10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1364 · DOI
  23. 10.1037/0096-3445.129.4.559 · DOI
  24. 10.1037/0021-9010.76.4.587 · DOI
  25. 10.1037/h0028434 · DOI
  26. 10.1080/13506280903178622 · DOI
  27. 10.1068/p5499 · DOI
  28. 10.3758/BF03193433 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.3758/BF03193954 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.1037/a0013464 · DOI
  31. 10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.3 · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.1080/13506280500158761 · DOI
  33. 10.1080/13506280902819697 · DOI
  34. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01752.x · DOI
  35. 10.3758/BF03208892 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.001 · DOI
  37. 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1989.tb02323.x · DOI
  38. 10.3758/BF03193876 · DOI
  39. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2004.00324.x · DOI
  40. 10.1037/0033-2909.100.2.139 · DOI · Paper page
  41. 10.1080/00207597408247104 · DOI
  42. 10.1163/156856801741369 · DOI
  43. 10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.36 · DOI
  44. Stahl, J., Wiese, H. & Schweinberger, S. R. (2008). Expertise and own-race bias in face processing: An event-related potential study. Neuroreport, 19, 583–587. · DOI
  45. 10.1080/14640749308401045 · DOI
  46. 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.011 · DOI
  47. 10.1080/14640749108400966 · DOI
  48. 10.1016/0001-6918(86)90085-5 · DOI
  49. 10.1080/14640749208401305 · DOI
  50. 10.1002/acp.1191 · DOI
  51. 10.1068/p5098 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2009.03.002 · DOI
  53. 10.1068/p160747 · DOI
  54. 10.3758/PBR.15.5.933 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Megreya, A. M., White, D., & Burton, A. M.
Affiliations
  • Department of Psychology, Menoufia University, Egypt
  • School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
  • School of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
Venue
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2011-08
Volume
64
Issue
8
Pages
1473-1483
ISSN
  • 1747-0218
  • 1747-0226
DOI
10.1080/17470218.2011.575228
Cited by
84
References
1
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review