Zebrowitz Bronstad Lee 2007

7/29/2019 Zebrowitz Bronstad Lee 2007

1/34

Social Cognition, Vol. 25 , No . 2,2007, p p. 306-338

THE CONTRIBUTION OF FACE FAMILIARITY TOINGROUP FAVORITISM AND STEREOTYPINGLeslie A. Zebrowitz and P. Matthew BronstadBrandeis UniversityHoon Koo LeeYonsei University

The familiar face overgeneralization hypothesis holds that an own-racepositivity bias is, in part, a perceptual by-product of reactions to familiarpeople versus unfamiliar-looking strangers. Because prototypical facialstructure varies across racial groups and communities are often raciallysegregated, strangers from one's ow n racial group should appear more fa-miliar than strangers from a different racial group, contribu ting to ingroupfavoritism and negative outgroup stereotypes. As predicted , the lower fa-miliarity of own- than other-race faces mediated Koreans' and WhiteAm ericans' ingroup favo ritism in Study 1 and Black and W hite Am ericans'ingroup favoritism in Study 2. Lower familiarity of other-race faces alsomediated negative stereotypes of other-race faces and partially suppressedpositive ones, w ith fam iliarity effects confined to affectively valenced ste-reotypes. The results suggest that the u nfamiliarity of othe r-race faces co n-tributes not only to ingroup favoritism but also to a dual-processstereotyping in whic h both cultura l be liefs and negative affective reactionsto unfamiliarity make a contribution.

The auth ors thank Irene Blair for sh aring her images of Black male faces with us, JudyHall for providing assistance and facilities for recruiting and running Black participants,Ryeo-Jin Ko for collecting data in Korea, Jeong-So ok Lee an d SoYoung Goode for translat-ing the experimental materials into Korean, Aviva Androphy, Shayna Skelley, NaomiSkop, Rebecca Wienerman , and G lenn Land auer for their help finding, scanning, and stan-dard izing facial images and collecting data in the United S tates, and Masako Kikuchi for


2/34

FACE FAMILIARITY, ING RO UP FAVORITISM, STEREOTYPING 307The variable of physical appearance has remained at the periphery of psy-chology, with the notable exceptions of research on attractiveness (cf, Hat-field &Sprecher, 1986; Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijard, & Longo, 1991; Feingold,1992; Langlois, Kalakanis, Rubenstein, Larson, Hallam, & Smoot, 2000;Rhodes & Zebrowitz, 2002) and babyfaceness (cf, Montepare & Zebrowitz,1998; Zebrow itz, 1997), The scant attention to appearance qualities is partic-ularly surprising in the dom ains of prejudice and stereotyping, since manystereotyped groups can be differentiated by their appearance. Ethnic and ra-cial groups look different from one another, as do the elderly and the young,the disabled and the able-bodied. Some groups are stereotyped solely on thebasis of their appearanceattractive people, obese people, short people,redheads. In the dominant model of stereotyping, appearance indirectlyleads to stereotypical attributions, Perceivers use appearance features tomake a racial or other categorization of an individual; once the classificationis made, stereotype-relevant knowledge is activated and applied to the in-dividual. In contrast, the face overgeneralization hypotheses proposed byZebrow itz (1996,1997,2004) hold tha t appearance can have a direct effect onprejudice and stereotyping. Grounded in an ecological approach to percep-tion (Gibson, 1966,1979; McArthur & Baron, 1983), these hypotheses holdthat socially or evolutionarily adaptive responses to certain facial attributesare overgeneralized to individuals whose facial qualities merely resemblethose with functional significance.The purpose of the present research was to investigate the contribution offamiliar face overgeneralization to racial prejudice and stereotyping. The fa-miliar face overgeneralization (FFO) hypothesis holds that the utility of dif-ferentiating known individuals from strangers has produced a tendency forresponses to strangers to vary as a function of their resemblance to knownindiv iduals (Zebrowitz, 1996,1997, 2004), Such an effect is consistent withthe exemplar-based model of social judgm ent, which holds that representa-tions of specific individuals influence judgments about similar persons andgroups (cf, Andersen & Berk, 1998; Smith & Zarate, 1992), Whereas thatmodel considers many determinants of similarity, FFO focuses on percep-tual determinants. Consistent w ith this hypothesis, reactions to people dodepend on their facial resemblance to known others. To give just one exam-ple, peers appeared more trustworthy when their photographs weremorphed so they resembled the perceiver (DeBruine, 2002; see also Hill,Lewicki, Czyzewska, & Schuller, 1990; Lewicki, 1985), Such effects exem-plify what has been called episodic familiarity (Peskin & Newell, 2004), In ad-dition to such idiosyncratic effects of FFO, a broader consequence is thatprejudiced responses to strangers of another race may vary with the famil-iarity of their appearance. Such effects exemplify what has been called gen-


3/34

308 ZEBROW ITZ, BRONSTAD, AND LEEexamining reactions to faces as a function of mean ratings of their familiarityacross multiple perceivers of the same race.

There are several reasons to expect FFO to contribute to racial prejudiceand stereotyping. First, prototypical facial structure varies across racialgroups,^ Second, communities are often racially segregated, Consequently,strangers from one's own racial group should appear more familiar thanstrangers from a different racial group because they are more similar to aknown facial prototype. Consistent with this argument, 6-month-old in-fants attended to a stranger's face that was an averaged prototype of knownfaces as if it were familiar (Rubenstein, Kalakanis, & Langlois, 1999), and, aspreviously mentioned, faces closer to the population average are rated asmore familiar even when they have never been seen before (Langlois et al,,1994), Finally, since it is well established that people prefer faces that havebecome familiar through repeated exposure (e,g,, Bornstein, 1989, 1993;Hamm , Baum, & Nikels, 1975; Peskin & New ell, 2004; Rhodes, Halberstad t,& Brajkovich, 2001; Zajonc, 1968), the greater familiarity of faces of strangersfrom one's own racial group should yield a preference for those faces. In-deed, the enhanced liking of known faces that results from exposure cangeneralize to similar-looking strangers (Rhodes et al,, 2001), and3-month-old infants show a visual preference for own-race faces only ifthey are living in a racially segregated environm ent(Bar-H aim, Ziv, Lamy,& Hodes, 2006), Although ingroup preferences also have been well docu-mented in adults (cf, Allen, 1996; Brewer, 1979; Cottrell & Neuberg, 2005;Dovidio & Gaertner, 1993; Fiske, 1998), they have not been linkedempirically to the familiarity of facial appearance .Recent research examining White judges' responses to faces varying in thedegree to which they resemble a prototypical Black face is consistent withthe hypothesis that familiarity may contribute to own-race bias, Livingstonand Brewer (2002) found that highly prototypical Black faces presented toWhite perceivers primed faster reaction times to stereotype-irrelevant neg-ative nouns (e,g,, poison, despair) than did low prototypical Black faces orWhite faces, and they concluded that associations to facial primes reflect af-fective responses to the racial prototypicality of the faces' perceptual quali-ties rather than a conceptual evaluation of the faces' racial categories.Similarly, Blair, Judd, Sadler, and Jenkins (2002) found that White judges at-tributed more negative traits to Black or White faces rated higher in"Afrocentricism," Eberhardt, Goff, Purdie, and Davies (2004) further found

1, It should be acknow ledged that anthropolog ists and biologists question the va lidity


4/34

FACE FAMILIARITY, INC RO UP FAVO RITISM, STEREOTYPING 309that Black faces rated high in stereotypicality of appearance were morelikely to be perceived as criminal by police officers than Black faces ratedlow in stereotypicality. And Blair, Judd, and C hapleau (2004) demonstratedthat inmates with more Afrocentric features received harsher sentences thanthose with less Afrocentric features, independent of their actual race. The re-sults of all of these stud ies as well as evidence for perceivers' implicit sensi-tivity to different degrees of Asian/Caucasian appearance in morphed faces(Locke, Macrae, & Eaton, 2005) indicate that responses to people do not havesharp racial category boundaries, but instead are inherently graded,depending upon race-related perceptual cues.There is an explanation besides familiarity for the finding that Afrocentricfeatures con tributed to White judges' negative responses to faces in the fore-going studies. In particular, these negative reactions could reflect a moregeneral prejudice against certain appearance qualities. The student ratersand court judges who contributed data for the research in the foregoingstudies were almost exclusively White. Thus, we do not know whetherBlack Americans would have reacted similarly to faces with more typicallyAfrican American features, thereby disconfirming a familiarity effect. In-deed, there is evidence to indicate that negative affective associations todark skin color are shared by people of varied ethnic and racial backgrounds(cf. Gergenl967; Hill, 2002; Maddox, 2004; Maddox & Gray, 2002; Uhlmann,Dasgupta, Elgueta, Greenwald, & Swanson, 2002; van den Berghe & Frost,1986), and there are automatic associations between object darkness andnegative valence (Meier, Robinson, & Clore, 2004).

To differentiate main effects of facial qualities from effects that vary withtheir familiarity to perceivers, the present research examined reactions tofaces by own-race and other-race judges. Study 1 investigated reactions toWhite and Korean faces by White Americans and K oreans. An advantage ofstudying these groups is that there is likely to be more symm etry in the unfa-miliarity of other-race faces for Koreans and Whites compared to Blacks andWhites. Black judges are a racial minority in the U nited States, and they re-port m ore familiarity with outgroup m embers than do W hite judges (e.g.,Judd, Park, Ryan, Brauer, & Kraus, 1995). Another advantage to studyingKorean and White judges is that there are positive stereotypes of Asiansamong American students. Study 2 investigated reactions to White andBlack faces by W hite Americans and Black Am ericans.

STUDY 1

Study 1 tested the FFO hypothesis that variations in the familiarity of ap-


5/34

310 ZEBROW ITZ, BRONSTAD, AND LEEWhite raters. We further expected that ingroup favoritism for both groupswould be mediated by the lower familiarity of other-race faces.Our predictions regard ing stereotypes take into account the fact that cul-tural beliefs can make a significant contribution independently of any ef-fects of familiarity. In U.S. culture, Asians are stereotyped by WhiteAmericans as law abiding, competent, and socially reserved, with the for-mer two stereotypes indicative of what has been dubbed the model minoritystereotype (Ho & Jackson, 2001; Kawai, 2005; Lin, Kwan, Cheung, & Fiske,2005; Niemann, Jennings, Rozelle, Baxter, & Sullivan, 1994). Thus, inde-pendent of reactions to an unfamiliar appearance. White Am erican ratersmay perceive Asian faces as less dangerous, more competent, and more re-served than W hite faces. Nevertheless, consistent with the FFO hypothesis,controlling familiarity should strengthen White Am ericans' positive stereo-types of Korean faces as less dangerous and more com petent by removingthe negative influence of an unfamiliar appearance. On the other hand,controlling familiarity should weaken negative stereotypes of Korean facesas more reserved.Although w e are not aware of any research that has investigated race ste-reotypes held by Koreans, we expected their ratings to parallel those ofWhite Americans either because they share the cu ltural stereotypes or be-cause of an ingroup positivity biasnot only are high com petence and lowdanger likely to be viewed positively by Koreans, but so is social reserve(Kim, A tkinson, & Yang, 1999). According to the FFO hypothesis, control-ling familiarity should weaken Koreans' negative stereotypes of other-raceWhite faces by removing the negative effects on impressions of anunfamiliar appearance.METHODRaters

Forty W hite Am erican and 40 Korean college undergraduates participated.All White raters received course credit; all Korean raters received the equiv-alent of $10 in their local currency. Equal numbers of male and female ratersfrom each racial group rated either Korean and White men's or women'straits and general appearance qualities. An additional 39 White Americanundergraduates and 48 Koreans rated the emotional expression of thefaces.^


6/34

FACE FAMILIARITY, INGRO UP FAVORITISM, STEREOTYPING 311

Facial S timuliThere were 60 White face images and 60 Korean face images. White facialimages were selected from four different databases. University of StirlingPICS database (http://pics.psych.stir.ac.uk/), the AR face database (Marti-nez & Benavente, 1998), NimStim,'' and two yearbooks (one high school andone university yearbook). Korean facial images were selected randomlyfrom a Korean university yearbook. We used four criteria for image selec-tion: neutral expression, no head tilt, no eyeglasses, and no beards. Imageswere edited in Photoshop to reraove jewelry and blemishes. For some im-ages, minor changes were made to the naso-labial folds and the corners ofthemouth to make the facial expression appear m ore neutra l. All faces wereshown in color against an identical beige background.Face RatingsLikeability and Stereotypes. Faces were rated on 7-point scales designed toassess ingroup favoritismLtfeaJ^/e (not at all likeable-very likeable)aswell as race stereotypes: Intelligent (unintelligent-intelligent). Hardworking(not very hardworking-very hardworking). Hostile (not at all hostile-veryhostile). Trustworthy (not at all trustworthy-very trustworthy), and Reserved(reserved / quiet-expressive /loud),Appearance. Faces were rated on 7-point scales designed to assess appear-ance qualities that may contribute to likeability and stereotypes: Familiar(not at all familiar-very familiar), Babyfaced (babyfaced-maturefaced). At-tractive (unattractive-attractive). The faces also were rated on two emotionexpression scales. First, participants judged whether each face had a neutralexpression. If they answered "no," they then specified which emotion thatface reflected, choosing among happy, sad, angry,fearful, disgust, and surprise.ProcedureWhite and Korean raters viewed images and input responses on Pentium 4personal computers with Windows XP and 19" CRT displays. Raters satwithin 36" of themonitors, MediaLab 2004,2,10arvis, 2004) was used to dis-play images and collect ratings. Faces were displayed for 5 seconds, or untila rating was made, and a random order of all Korean and White faces wasrated on one scale before raters proceeded to the next scale in order to mini-mize carryover effects in ratings from one scale to another. A different ran-


7/34

312 ZEBROW ITZ, BRONSTAD, AN D LEEdom order of faces was presented for each rating scale. All raters ratedfamiliarity first followed by likeability, with attractiveness andbabyfaceness rated after the traits. The order of trait ratings was Intelligent,Reserved, Hostile, Trustworthy, Hardworking for one group of raters andthe reverse order for a second g roup. Familiarity was always rated first be-cause we were interested in the relative familiarity of ow n- and other-racestrangers who had never before been seen. Raters received the following ad-ditional instructions for familiarity ratings: "Sometimes a face looks familiarto us even though we've never seen the person before. A lthough you have-n't seen any of the following faces before, please rate how familiar each onelooks to you."Korean TranslationAll rating scales were translated into Korean by a native Korean speaker, Asecond native Korean speaker translated the Korean back into English, andthese results were compared to the original English-language scales. For anydiscrepancies, the native Korean speakers were consulted to retranslate thescales so that the meaning in Korean was as close as possible to the meaningin English,RESULTSReliability of Measures and Trait CompositesCronbach alphas for ratings of familiar and likeable were a=,94 and a = ,93for Korean raters and a = ,95 and a = ,90 for White raters, Cronbach alphasfor attractiveness and babyfaceness were a = ,90 and a = .93 for Korean ra tersand a = .87 and a = ,90 for White raters .We created two a priori trait composite variables related to the U,S, stereo-type of Asians as a law abiding and competent "model minority," R atings ofhostile and trustworthy (reverse scored) were summed to create a dangercomposite, which had alpha coefficients of .90 and ,92 for Korean and Whiteraters, respectively. Ratings of hardw orking and intelligent were summedto create a competence composite, which had alpha coefficients of .93 and ,91for Korean and White raters, respectively. Ratings of the indiv idual trait re-served had alpha coefficients of ,81 and .87 for Korean and White raters, re-spectively. Confirmatory principal component factor analyses performed


8/34

FACE FAMILIARITY, ING RO UP FAVORITISM, STEREOTYPING 313The high inter-ra ter reliabilities for the appearance ratings and trait com-posites justified data analyses utilizing mean ratings for each face across

White judges and across Korean judges as the unit of analysis. These analy-ses tested the hypothesis that som e faces look more familiar than o ther facesacross all perceivers of a given race and that these variations account for pa rtof the effect of face race on likeability and stereotypes.Emotional AppearanceThe majority of faces were perceived as showing no em otion by all partici-pants (68% of White faces and 66% of Korean faces). Happiness was the mostcommon emotion detected, identified, on average, in 11% of the White facesand 16% of the Korean faces. We therefore created a smile score for each faceby dividing the number of times it had been identified as happy by the totalnum ber of participants. We did this for participants of each race, thus gener-ating tw o smile scores per face. We did not control for other emotions, sincethey were even more rarely detected, identified on average in only 4% of thefaces,

Ingroup Favoritism and StereotypesWe performed separate 2 (face race) x 2 (rater race) ANOVAs on mean rat-ings of the faces on likeability and the trait scales. Means and f values areshown in Table 1, A tendency for Korean faces to be more likeable was quali-fied by the predicted face race x rater race interaction effect, indicating thatown-race faces were judged as more likeable. Planned comparisons re-vealed that the simple effect for ingroup favoritism was significant for Ko-rean raters , f(118) = 5,07, p < ,001, bu t not for W hite raters, t < 1. Consistentwith the prediction of shared stereotypes, both White and Korean raters per-ceived Korean faces to be lower than White ones on the danger composite,and higher on the competence composite and the trait reserved. Significantface race x rater race interaction effects for the competence composite and re-served ratings revealed stronger effects for W hite than for Korean raters, al-though the effects were significant for both groups, respective fs(118) = 11,03and 3,52 for competence and 9.37 and 2,60, for reserved , all ps < ,01. The facerace x rater race interaction effect was no t significant for the danger compos-ite. Although we had no predictions for main effects of rater race. Whiteraters gave higher ratings on likeability and competence and lower ratingson danger.


9/34

314 ZEBROWITZ, BRONSTAD, AND LEE

oz

3

2 S

00 -*1-^ eNIN

Ov ON ^ (N (NCN T-H in CN

s

s

NOen

oeNen0 0o en oo CO ooLT)

(N CO CO CO eN CO


10/34

FACE FAMILIARITY, INC RO UP FAVO RITISM, STEREOTYPING 315

D oe s Face Famil iarity M ediate Ingrou p Favorit ism andStereotypes?As a first step in exam ining face familiarity as a med iato r of ing ro up favorit-ism and stereotypes, we performed separate 2 (face race) x 2 (rater race)AN OV As on m ean ratings of the faces on familiarity, as well as the other a p-pea ranc e qualities of attractiven ess, sm iling, an d babyfaceness that also cou ldaffect likeability and trait ratings. M ean s and F value s are sh ow n in Table 1,Con sistent with the hyp othesis tha t face familiarity m ediates ing rou p favor-itism, familiarity ratings paralleled the likeability ratings, A tendency for Ko-rean faces to be rated more familiar was qualified by a highly significant raterrace x face race interaction effect indicating that faces of own-race strangersw ere judg ed to look m ore familiar th an those of other-race stran gers. Plann edcom parisons revealed that this effect was significant for both K orean an d W hiteraters, respective ts (118) = 11,92 and 9,16, bothps


11/34

316 ZEBRO WiTZ, BRONSTAD, AND LEE

tu

>2c

COJSy,'oI

uo

0160

CO

creO

goOViJOcre

O O rH r-

Documents

Zebrowitz Bronstad Lee 2007