Perception of an ambiguous figure is affected by own-age social biases

Although the perception of faces depends on low-level neuronal processes, it is also affected by high-level social processes. Faces from a social in-group, such as people of a similar age, receive more in-depth processing and are processed holistically. To explore whether own-age biases affect subconscious face perception, we presented participants with the young/old lady ambiguous figure. Mechanical Turk was used to sample participants of varying ages from the USA. Results demonstrated that younger and older participants estimated the age of the image as younger and older, respectively. This own-age effect ties in with socio-cultural practices, which are less inclusive towards the elderly. Participants were not aware the study was related to ageing and the stimulus was shown briefly. The results therefore demonstrate that high-level social group processes have a subconscious effect on the early stages of face processing. A neural feedback model is used to explain this interaction.

[1]  Leib Litman,et al.  The relationship between motivation, monetary compensation, and data quality among US- and India-based workers on Mechanical Turk , 2014, Behavior Research Methods.

[2]  Olivier Corneille,et al.  Holistic Processing Is Tuned for In-Group Faces , 2009, Cogn. Sci..

[3]  E. Boring A new ambiguous figure. , 1930 .

[4]  Mark H Johnson,et al.  Rapid Orienting toward Face-like Stimuli with Gaze-Relevant Contrast Information , 2009, Perception.

[5]  Graham J Hole,et al.  Evidence for a contact-based explanation of the own-age bias in face recognition , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[6]  P Brugger,et al.  The Easter Bunny in October: Is it Disguised as a Duck? , 1993, Perceptual and motor skills.

[7]  Holger Wiese,et al.  Ageing faces in ageing minds: A review on the own-age bias in face recognition , 2013 .

[8]  John Harris,et al.  Biasing Effects in Ambiguous Figures: Removal or Fixation of Critical Features Can Affect Perception , 1997 .

[9]  T. Zandi,et al.  Children's Attitudes toward Elderly Individuals: A Comparison of Two Ethnic Groups , 1990, International journal of aging & human development.

[10]  M. Bar A Cortical Mechanism for Triggering Top-Down Facilitation in Visual Object Recognition , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  Kyle G. Ratner,et al.  Seeing “us vs. them”: Minimal group effects on the neural encoding of faces , 2013 .

[12]  Matthew G. Rhodes,et al.  The own-age bias in face recognition: a meta-analytic and theoretical review. , 2012, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  Michael D. Buhrmester,et al.  Amazon's Mechanical Turk , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[14]  N. Haslam,et al.  Essentialist beliefs about social categories. , 2000, The British journal of social psychology.

[15]  William A. Cunningham,et al.  The Neural Substrates of In-Group Bias , 2008, Psychological science.

[16]  J. Wagemans,et al.  An anxiety-induced bias in the perception of a bistable point-light walker. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[17]  Corinna E. Löckenhoff,et al.  Perceptions of aging across 26 cultures and their culture-level associates. , 2009, Psychology and aging.

[18]  Michael Bach,et al.  Ambiguous Figures – What Happens in the Brain When Perception Changes But Not the Stimulus , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[19]  J. Langlois,et al.  Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. , 2000, Psychological bulletin.

[20]  Emily Balcetis,et al.  See what you want to see: motivational influences on visual perception. , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[21]  R. Hackett,et al.  Parental Ideas of Normal and Deviant Child Behaviour , 1993, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[22]  S. L. Sporer,et al.  Recognizing faces of other ethnic groups: An integration of theories. , 2001 .

[23]  Amar Cheema,et al.  Data collection in a flat world: the strengths and weaknesses of mechanical turk samples , 2013 .