The contribution of face familiarity to ingroup favoritism and stereotyping
Abstract
The familiar face overgeneralization hypothesis holds that an own–race positivity bias is, in part, a perceptual by–product of reactions to familiar people versus unfamiliar–looking strangers. Because prototypical facial structure varies across racial groups and communities are often racially segregated, strangers from one's own racial group should appear more familiar than strangers from a different racial group, contributing to ingroup favoritism and negative outgroup stereotypes. As predicted, the lower familiarity of own– than other–race faces mediated Koreans' and White Americans' ingroup favoritism in Study 1 and Black and White Americans' ingroup favoritism in Study 2. Lower familiarity of other–race faces also mediated negative stereotypes of other–race faces and partially suppressed positive ones, with familiarity effects confined to affectively valenced stereotypes. The results suggest that the unfamiliarity of other–race faces contributes not only to ingroup favoritism but also to a dual-process stereotyping in which both cultural beliefs and negative affective reactions to unfamiliarity make a contribution.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The choice of using intelligence, trustworthiness, sociability and happiness as dependent attributes for the halo effect was driven by existing literature.
“The choice of using intelligence, trustworthiness, sociability and happiness as dependent attributes for the halo effect was driven by existing literature on this cognitive bias, such as [4,6,8,9,22,53,60–63].”
From What is beautiful is still good: the attractiveness halo effect in the era of beauty filters (2024) · cites this paper as [61]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 81 · Cited by 108
- Authors
- Zebrowitz, L. A., Bronstad, P. M., & Lee, H. K.
- Affiliations
- Brandeis University (US)
- Yonsei University (KR)
- Venue
- Social Cognition
- Publisher
- Guilford Publications
- Published
- 2007-04
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 306-338
- ISSN
- 0278-016X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2140501358
- Cited by
- 108
- References
- 81
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 12 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 6.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Social Cognition (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Keywords
- face familiarity, in-group favoritism, stereotyping, racial segregation, Korean Americans, African Americans, White Americans
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