↓ Skip to main content

Social Groups Prioritize Selective Attention to Faces: How Social Identity Shapes Distractor Interference

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Social Groups Prioritize Selective Attention to Faces: How Social Identity Shapes Distractor Interference
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2016
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0161426
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gewnhi Park, Jay J. van Bavel, LaBarron K. Hill, DeWayne P. Williams, Julian F. Thayer

Abstract

Human faces automatically attract visual attention and this process appears to be guided by social group memberships. In two experiments, we examined how social groups guide selective attention toward in-group and out-group faces. Black and White participants detected a target letter among letter strings superimposed on faces (Experiment 1). White participants were less accurate on trials with racial out-group (Black) compared to in-group (White) distractor faces. Likewise, Black participants were less accurate on trials with racial out-group (White) compared to in-group (Black) distractor faces. However, this pattern of out-group bias was only evident under high perceptual load-when the task was visually difficult. To examine the malleability of this pattern of racial bias, a separate sample of participants were assigned to mixed-race minimal groups (Experiment 2). Participants assigned to groups were less accurate on trials with their minimal in-group members compared to minimal out-group distractor faces, regardless of race. Again, this pattern of out-group bias was only evident under high perceptual load. Taken together, these results suggest that social identity guides selective attention toward motivationally relevant social groups-shifting from out-group bias in the domain of race to in-group bias in the domain of minimal groups-when perceptual resources are scarce.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 20%
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 8 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 64%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 9 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 29 August 2016.
All research outputs
#7,503,827
of 24,340,143 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#95,880
of 209,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,443
of 347,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,563
of 4,266 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,340,143 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 209,798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 347,589 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,266 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.