Kurt Hugenberg

Separating multiple processes in implicit social cognition: the quad model of implicit task performance.

The authors argue that implicit measures of social cognition do not reflect only automatic processes but rather the joint contributions of multiple, qualitatively different processes. The quadruple process model proposed and tested in the present article quantitatively disentangles the influences of 4 distinct processes on implicit task performance: the likelihood that automatic bias is activated by a stimulus; that a correct response can be determined; that automatic bias is overcome; and that, in the absence of other information, a guessing bias drives responses. The stochastic and construct validity of the model is confirmed in 5 studies. The model is shown to provide a more nuanced and detailed understanding of the interplay of multiple processes in implicit task performance, including implicit measures of attitudes, prejudice, and stereotyping.

The Cross-Category Effect: Mere Social Categorization Is Sufficient to Elicit an Own-Group Bias in Face Recognition

Although the cross-race effect (CRE) is a well-established phenomenon, both perceptual-expertise and social-categorization models have been proposed to explain the effect. The two studies reported here investigated the extent to which categorizing other people as in-group versus out-group members is sufficient to elicit a pattern of face recognition analogous to that of the CRE, even when perceptual expertise with the stimuli is held constant. In Study 1, targets were categorized as members of real-life in-groups and out-groups (based on university affiliation), whereas in Study 2, targets were categorized into experimentally created minimal groups. In both studies, recognition performance was better for targets categorized as in-group members, despite the fact that perceptual expertise was equivalent for in-group and out-group faces. These results suggest that social-cognitive mechanisms of in-group and out-group categorization are sufficient to elicit performance differences for in-group and out-group face recognition.

The Categorization-Individuation Model: An Integrative Account of the Other-Race Recognition Deficit.

The other-race effect (ORE), or the finding that same-race faces are better recognized than other-race faces, is one of the best replicated phenomena in face recognition. The current article reviews existing evidence and theory and proposes a new theoretical framework for the ORE, which argues that the effect results from a confluence of social categorization, motivated individuation, and perceptual experience. This categorization-individuation model offers not only a parsimonious account of both classic and recent evidence for category-based biases in face recognition but also links the ORE to broader evidence and theory in social cognition and face perception. Finally, the categorization-individuation model makes a series of novel predictions for how the ORE can be exacerbated, attenuated, or even eliminated via perceptual and motivational processes, both by improving other-race recognition and by reducing same-race recognition. The authors propose that this new model for the ORE also leads to applied interventions that differ sharply from other theories of the ORE, while simultaneously providing an integrative theoretical framework for future research on the ORE.

The self-regulation of automatic associations and behavioral impulses

The distinction between automatic processes and controlled processes is a central organizational theme across areas of psychology. However, this dichotomy conceals important differences among qualitatively different processes that independently contribute to ongoing behavior. The Quadruple process model is a multinomial model that provides quantitative estimates of 4 distinct processes in a single task: the likelihood that an automatic response tendency is activated; the likelihood that a contextually appropriate response can be determined; the likelihood that automatic response tendencies are overcome when necessary; and the likelihood that in the absence of other information, behavior is driven by a general response bias. The model integrates dual-process models from many domains of inquiry and offers a generalized, more nuanced framework of impulse regulation across these domains. The model offers insights into many central questions surrounding the operation and the interaction of automatic and controlled processes. Applications of the model to empirical and theoretical concerns in a variety of areas of psychology are discussed.

Eye Gaze as Relational Evaluation: Averted Eye Gaze Leads to Feelings of Ostracism and Relational Devaluation

Eye gaze is often a signal of interest and, when noticed by others, leads to mutual and directional gaze. However, averting one’s eye gaze toward an individual has the potential to convey a strong interpersonal evaluation. The averting of eye gaze is the most frequently used nonverbal cue to indicate the silent treatment, a form of ostracism. The authors argue that eye gaze can signal the relational value felt toward another person. In three studies, participants visualized interacting with an individual displaying averted or direct eye gaze. Compared to receiving direct eye contact, participants receiving averted eye gaze felt ostracized, signaled by thwarted basic need satisfaction, reduced explicit and implicit self-esteem, lowered relational value, and increased temptations to act aggressively toward the interaction partner.

Social categorization and the perception of facial affect: target race moderates the response latency advantage for happy faces.

Two experiments competitively test 3 potential mechanisms (negativity inhibiting responses, feature-based accounts, and evaluative context) for the response latency advantage for recognizing happy expressions by investigating how the race of a target can moderate the strength of the effect. Both experiments indicate that target race modulates the happy face advantage, such that European American participants displayed the happy face advantage for White target faces, but displayed a response latency advantage for angry (Experiments 1 and 2) and sad (Experiment 2) Black target faces. This pattern of findings is consistent with an evaluative context mechanism and inconsistent with negativity inhibition and feature-based accounts of the happy face advantage. Thus, the race of a target face provides an evaluative context in which facial expressions are categorized.

Perception and Motivation in Face Recognition: A Critical Review of Theories of the Cross-Race Effect

Although humans possess well-developed face processing expertise, face processing is nevertheless subject to a variety of biases. Perhaps the best known of these biases is the Cross-Race Effect—the tendency to have more accurate recognition for same-race than cross-race faces. The current work reviews the evidence for and provides a critical review of theories of the Cross-Race Effect, including perceptual expertise and social cognitive accounts of the bias. The authors conclude that recent hybrid models of the Cross-Race Effect, which combine elements of both perceptual expertise and social cognitive frameworks, provide an opportunity for theoretical synthesis and advancement not afforded by independent expertise or social cognitive models. Finally, the authors suggest future research directions intended to further develop a comprehensive and integrative understanding of biases in face recognition.

Being “In” With the In-Crowd: The Effects of Social Exclusion and Inclusion Are Enhanced by the Perceived Essentialism of Ingroups and Outgroups

Social belonging is an essential human need. Belonging to social groups serves an important role in shaping our social identities. Nonetheless, research indicates that exclusion by ingroup and outgroup members seems equally aversive. The current studies test the hypothesis that unlike more trivial groups (e.g., smoking or computer preferences), highly essentialized groups may lead to differential effects of ingroup versus outgroup rejection. Consistent with this, exclusion and inclusion by racial ingroup members (relative to racial outgroup members) exacerbated the sting of rejection and the glow of inclusion (Study 1). In a second study, direct manipulations of essentialist beliefs about ingroups and outgroups (i.e., political affiliations) led to the same results. These results offer a novel demonstration that essentialized ingroup—outgroup distinctions enhance the sting of social exclusion and the positivity of social inclusion.

Implicit Theories About Groups and Stereotyping The Role of Group Entitativity

The consequences of holding an entity (i.e., the belief that a groups characteristics are fixed) or incremental (i.e., the belief that a groups characteristics are malleable) implicit theory about groups was examined for stereotyping and perceptions of group entitativity. Two studies showed that implicit theories about groups affect stereotyping by changing perceptions of group entitativity. Study 1 found that entity theorists were more likely to stereotype than incremental theorists and that perception of group entitativity significantly accounted for this relation. In Study 2, implicit theories of groups were manipulated via instruction set and entity theorists stereotyped more and perceived groups as more entitative than incremental theorists. Again, the effect of implicit theory was significantly, although partially, mediated by perceptions of group entitativity. The roles of implicit theories about groups and perceptions of group entitativity are discussed regarding stereotyping.

Holistic processing is tuned for in-group faces

Past research has found that mere in-group/out-group categorizations are sufficient to elicit biases in face memory. The current research yields novel evidence that mere social categorization is also sufficient to modulate processes underlying face perception, even for faces for which we have strong perceptual expertise: same-race (SR) faces. Using the composite face paradigm, we find that SR faces categorized as in-group members (i.e., fellow university students) are processed more holistically than are SR faces categorized as out-group members (i.e., students at another university). Hence, holding perceptual expertise with faces constant, categorizing an SR target as an out-group member debilitates the strong holistic processing typically observed for SR faces.