Dilhan Töredi, Jamal K. Mansour, Sian E. Jones, Faye Skelton, Alex McIntyre
{"title":"少数族裔地位对跨种族效应的影响:一个批判性的回顾","authors":"Dilhan Töredi, Jamal K. Mansour, Sian E. Jones, Faye Skelton, Alex McIntyre","doi":"10.1177/17456916251345459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Meta-analyses have consistently demonstrated the robustness of the cross-race effect (CRE; i.e., better recognition of same-race faces compared with different-race faces). These analyses have unveiled variations in the dependent variables associated with the CRE across combinations of participant and target races. However, the underlying factors driving these variations remain poorly understood. We posit that although the CRE is robust, its generalizability may be contingent on the specific racial groups compared, particularly when contrasting majority and minority racial groups. In this article, we delve into the dynamics of the CRE across distinct racial groups and explore how minority-race status may influence research outcomes. We considered the articles included in the latest meta-analyses of the CRE with a spotlight on minority-race status. We suggest that minority-race status may explain why many studies considering non-White participants do not show a CRE. The CRE might not be as robust as it appears to be because much of the research on the effect has focused on majority-race participants and minority-race faces. Going forward, researchers should consider incorporating measures relevant to the minority effect, fully crossing participant and target races and studying a greater variety of races.","PeriodicalId":19757,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Minority-Race Status on the Cross-Race Effect: A Critical Review\",\"authors\":\"Dilhan Töredi, Jamal K. Mansour, Sian E. Jones, Faye Skelton, Alex McIntyre\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17456916251345459\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Meta-analyses have consistently demonstrated the robustness of the cross-race effect (CRE; i.e., better recognition of same-race faces compared with different-race faces). These analyses have unveiled variations in the dependent variables associated with the CRE across combinations of participant and target races. However, the underlying factors driving these variations remain poorly understood. We posit that although the CRE is robust, its generalizability may be contingent on the specific racial groups compared, particularly when contrasting majority and minority racial groups. In this article, we delve into the dynamics of the CRE across distinct racial groups and explore how minority-race status may influence research outcomes. We considered the articles included in the latest meta-analyses of the CRE with a spotlight on minority-race status. We suggest that minority-race status may explain why many studies considering non-White participants do not show a CRE. The CRE might not be as robust as it appears to be because much of the research on the effect has focused on majority-race participants and minority-race faces. Going forward, researchers should consider incorporating measures relevant to the minority effect, fully crossing participant and target races and studying a greater variety of races.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19757,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Psychological Science\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Psychological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251345459\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916251345459","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Impact of Minority-Race Status on the Cross-Race Effect: A Critical Review
Meta-analyses have consistently demonstrated the robustness of the cross-race effect (CRE; i.e., better recognition of same-race faces compared with different-race faces). These analyses have unveiled variations in the dependent variables associated with the CRE across combinations of participant and target races. However, the underlying factors driving these variations remain poorly understood. We posit that although the CRE is robust, its generalizability may be contingent on the specific racial groups compared, particularly when contrasting majority and minority racial groups. In this article, we delve into the dynamics of the CRE across distinct racial groups and explore how minority-race status may influence research outcomes. We considered the articles included in the latest meta-analyses of the CRE with a spotlight on minority-race status. We suggest that minority-race status may explain why many studies considering non-White participants do not show a CRE. The CRE might not be as robust as it appears to be because much of the research on the effect has focused on majority-race participants and minority-race faces. Going forward, researchers should consider incorporating measures relevant to the minority effect, fully crossing participant and target races and studying a greater variety of races.
期刊介绍:
Perspectives on Psychological Science is a journal that publishes a diverse range of articles and reports in the field of psychology. The journal includes broad integrative reviews, overviews of research programs, meta-analyses, theoretical statements, book reviews, and articles on various topics such as the philosophy of science and opinion pieces about major issues in the field. It also features autobiographical reflections of senior members of the field, occasional humorous essays and sketches, and even has a section for invited and submitted articles.
The impact of the journal can be seen through the reverberation of a 2009 article on correlative analyses commonly used in neuroimaging studies, which still influences the field. Additionally, a recent special issue of Perspectives, featuring prominent researchers discussing the "Next Big Questions in Psychology," is shaping the future trajectory of the discipline.
Perspectives on Psychological Science provides metrics that showcase the performance of the journal. However, the Association for Psychological Science, of which the journal is a signatory of DORA, recommends against using journal-based metrics for assessing individual scientist contributions, such as for hiring, promotion, or funding decisions. Therefore, the metrics provided by Perspectives on Psychological Science should only be used by those interested in evaluating the journal itself.