How prevalent is "other ethnicity blindness"? Exploring the extremes of recognition performance across categories of faces.

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Jeremy J Tree, Alex L Jones
{"title":"How prevalent is \"other ethnicity blindness\"? Exploring the extremes of recognition performance across categories of faces.","authors":"Jeremy J Tree, Alex L Jones","doi":"10.1037/xge0001730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The other ethnicity effect (OEE) refers to the common finding that individuals generally perform better in recognizing faces from their own ethnicity than from others. Wan et al. (2017) identified a subset of individuals with a marked difficulty in recognizing other ethnicity faces, termed other ethnicity blindness (OEB). This study further examines the prevalence of OEB in two large samples of Asian and Caucasian participants, using three analytical approaches to assess face recognition across different ethnic face categories. The first method, based on Wan's percentile-rank approach, additionally adjusted for regression to the mean (RTM), found a 1.9% OEB prevalence, lower than their earlier estimates (8.1% [7.5, 10.6]). Moreover, those identified often displayed generally poor face recognition skills. The second approach, akin to a single-case \"dissociation\" method (Crawford et al., 2003), classified just one individual (0.25%) as OEB. The third method defined OEB purely as an exaggeratedly large OEE, without using traditional \"cutoff\" scores, but adjusted for RTM, observed 1.33% of participants exhibited this profile. Bayesian simulations supported these OEB prevalence rates. Overall, the findings highlight the critical importance of accounting for factors like own-ethnicity performance, measurement error and RTM. We also advocate for more conservative classification methods in future OEB research and emphasize that while OEB is rare, it can be observed in some individuals. Specifically, adopting the classification of OEB as a \"hyper\" OEE profile may provide a valuable avenue for future research exploration both with respect to those interested in individual variability in OEE and more generally variability in within-class recognition performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001730","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The other ethnicity effect (OEE) refers to the common finding that individuals generally perform better in recognizing faces from their own ethnicity than from others. Wan et al. (2017) identified a subset of individuals with a marked difficulty in recognizing other ethnicity faces, termed other ethnicity blindness (OEB). This study further examines the prevalence of OEB in two large samples of Asian and Caucasian participants, using three analytical approaches to assess face recognition across different ethnic face categories. The first method, based on Wan's percentile-rank approach, additionally adjusted for regression to the mean (RTM), found a 1.9% OEB prevalence, lower than their earlier estimates (8.1% [7.5, 10.6]). Moreover, those identified often displayed generally poor face recognition skills. The second approach, akin to a single-case "dissociation" method (Crawford et al., 2003), classified just one individual (0.25%) as OEB. The third method defined OEB purely as an exaggeratedly large OEE, without using traditional "cutoff" scores, but adjusted for RTM, observed 1.33% of participants exhibited this profile. Bayesian simulations supported these OEB prevalence rates. Overall, the findings highlight the critical importance of accounting for factors like own-ethnicity performance, measurement error and RTM. We also advocate for more conservative classification methods in future OEB research and emphasize that while OEB is rare, it can be observed in some individuals. Specifically, adopting the classification of OEB as a "hyper" OEE profile may provide a valuable avenue for future research exploration both with respect to those interested in individual variability in OEE and more generally variability in within-class recognition performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信