↓ Skip to main content

The other-race and other-species effects in face perception – a subordinate-level analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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.
Title
The other-race and other-species effects in face perception – a subordinate-level analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01068
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoph D. Dahl, Malte J. Rasch, Chien-Chung Chen

Abstract

The ability of face discrimination is modulated by the frequency of exposure to a category of faces. In other words, lower discrimination performance was measured for infrequently encountered faces as opposed to frequently encountered ones. This phenomenon has been described in the literature: the own-race advantage, a benefit in processing own-race as opposed to the other-race faces, and the own-species advantage, a benefit in processing the conspecific type of faces as opposed to the heterospecific type. So far, the exact parameters that drive either of these two effects are not fully understood. In the following we present a full assessment of data in human participants describing the discrimination performances across two races (Asian and Caucasian) as well as a range of non-human primate faces (chimpanzee, Rhesus macaque and marmoset). We measured reaction times of Asian participants performing a delayed matching-to-sample task, and correlated the results with similarity estimates of facial configuration and face parts. We found faster discrimination of own-race above other-race/species faces. Further, we found a strong reliance on configural information in upright own-species/-race faces and on individual face parts in all inverted face classes, supporting the assumption of specialized processing for the face class of most frequent exposure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
United States 1 2%
France 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 38 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Researcher 6 14%
Professor 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Other 9 21%
Unknown 2 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 67%
Neuroscience 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 6 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 October 2014.
All research outputs
#14,786,093
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,055
of 29,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,624
of 250,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#269
of 361 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,675 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 250,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 361 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.