↓ Skip to main content

Skin and Bones: The Contribution of Skin Tone and Facial Structure to Racial Prototypicality Ratings

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
10 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Skin and Bones: The Contribution of Skin Tone and Facial Structure to Racial Prototypicality Ratings
Published in
PLOS ONE, July 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0041193
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Previous research reveals that a more 'African' appearance has significant social consequences, yielding more negative first impressions and harsher criminal sentencing of Black or White individuals. This study is the first to systematically assess the relative contribution of skin tone and facial metrics to White, Black, and Korean perceivers' ratings of the racial prototypicality of faces from the same three groups. Our results revealed that the relative contribution of metrics and skin tone depended on both perceiver race and face race. White perceivers' racial prototypicality ratings were less responsive to variations in skin tone than were Black or Korean perceivers' ratings. White perceivers ratings' also were more responsive to facial metrics than to skin tone, while the reverse was true for Black perceivers. Additionally, across all perceiver groups, skin tone had a more consistent impact than metrics on racial prototypicality ratings of White faces, with the reverse for Korean faces. For Black faces, the relative impact varied with perceiver race: skin tone had a more consistent impact than metrics for Black and Korean perceivers, with the reverse for White perceivers. These results have significant implications for predicting who will experience racial prototypicality biases and from whom.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 45 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Student > Master 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 6 13%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 June 2026.
All research outputs
#2,986,118
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#32,094
of 224,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,870
of 213,278 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#512
of 4,322 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 213,278 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,322 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.