↓ Skip to main content

Categorizing Two Taiwanese Major Political Parties From Their Faces: The Influence of Provincial Appearance

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Categorizing Two Taiwanese Major Political Parties From Their Faces: The Influence of Provincial Appearance
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00271
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chien-Kai Chang, Mary Wen-Reng Ho, Sarina Hui-Lin Chien

Abstract

People go beyond the inferences afforded by a person's observable features to make guesses about personality traits or even social memberships such as political affiliations. The present study extended Hu et al. (2016) to further investigate the influence of provincial appearance on differentiating KMT (Kuomintang) and DPP (Democratic Progressive Party) candidates by headshot photos with three experiments. In Experiment 1 (Membership categorization task), participants categorized the photos from the pilot study (where the difference between the perceived age of KMT and DPP candidates was reduced) and divided into four blocks by their perceived age. We found that participants were able to distinguish KMT from DPP candidates significantly better than chance, even when the perceived age difference between the two parties was minimized. In Experiment 2 (Trait rating task), we asked young and middle-aged adults to rate six traits on candidate's photos. We found that "provincial appearance" is the core trait differentiating the two parties for both young and older participants, while "facial maturity" is another trait for older participants only. In Experiment 3 (Double categorization task), we asked participants to categorize the photos from the Exp. 1 on their membership (KMT or DPP) and on provincial appearance (mainlander or native Taiwanese) in two separate sessions. Results showed that young adults were likely to use the "provincial appearance" as the main characteristic cue to categorize candidates' political membership. In sum, our study showed that Taiwanese adults could categorize the two parties by their headshot photos when age cue was eliminated. Moreover, provincial appearance was the most critical trait for differentiating between KMT and DPP candidates, which may reflect a piece of significant history during the development of the two parties.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 60%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 80%
Unknown 1 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#18,587,406
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,495
of 30,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,159
of 332,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#525
of 582 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,282 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 332,392 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 582 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.