Removing the own-race bias in face recognition by attentional shift using fixation crosses to diagnostic features: An eye-tracking study

Hills and Lewis (2011) have demonstrated that the own-race bias in face recognition can be reduced or even removed by guiding participants' attention and potentially eye movements to the most diagnostic visual features. Using the same old/new recognition paradigm as Hills and Lewis, we recorded Black and White participants' eye movements whilst viewing Black and White faces following fixation crosses that preceded the bridge of the nose (between the eyes) or the tip of the nose. White faces were more accurately recognized when following high fixation crosses (that preceded the bridge of the nose) than when following low fixation crosses. The converse was true for Black faces. These effects were independent of participant race. The fixation crosses attracted the first fixation but had less effect on other eye-tracking measures. Furthermore, the location of the first fixation was predictive of recognition accuracy. These results are consistent with an attentional allocation model of the own-race bias in face recognition and highlight the importance of the first fixation for face perception (cf. Hsiao & Cottrell, 2008)

Attentional modulation of the carry over of eye-movements between tasks

Task demands that influence scanning behaviour in one task can cause that behaviour to persist to a second unrelated task (carry over). This can also affect performance on a second task (e.g., hazard perception ratings), and has been attributed to a process of attentional bias that is modulated by top-down influences (Thompson & Crundall, 2011). In a series of experiments we explored how these top-down influences impact upon carry over. In all experiments, participants searched letters that were presented horizontally, vertically, or in a random array. They were then presented with a driving scene and rated the hazardousness of the scene. Carry over of eye-movements from the letter search to the scene was observed in all experiments. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that this carry over effect influenced hazard perception accuracy. The magnitude of carry over was correlated with task switching abilities, attentional conflicting, and attentional orienting (Experiment 1), and was affected by predictability of the primary task (Experiment 2). Furthermore, direct current stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and parietal areas affected the magnitude of the effect (Experiment 3). These results indicate that carry over is modulated by the specific ability to orient attention and disengage from this orientation. Over orienting leads to increased carry over and insufficient task switching is detrimental to task performance. As a result the current experiments provide evidence that the carry over effect is strongly influenced by attentional processes, namely orienting, inhibition, and task switching

Eye-tracking the own-race bias in face recognition: Revealing the perceptual and socio-cognitive mechanisms

Own-race faces are recognised more accurately than other-race faces and may even be viewed differently as measured by an eye-tracker (Goldinger, Papesh, & He, 2009). Alternatively, observer race might direct eye-movements (Blais, Jack, Scheepers, Fiset, & Caldara, 2008). Observer differences in eye-movements are likely to be based on experience of the physiognomic characteristics that are differentially discriminating for Black and White faces. Two experiments are reported that employed standard old/new recognition paradigms in which Black and White observers viewed Black and White faces with their eye-movements recorded. Experiment 1 showed that there were observer race differences in terms of the features scanned but observers employed the same strategy across different types of faces. Experiment 2 demonstrated that other-race faces could be recognised more accurately if participants had their first fixation directed to more diagnostic features using fixation crosses. These results are entirely consistent with those presented by Blais et al. (2008) and with the perceptual interpretation that the own-race bias is due to inappropriate attention allocated to the facial features (Hills and Lewis, 2006, Hills and Lewis, 2011)

Aberrant first fixations when looking at inverted faces in various poses: The result of the centre-of-gravity effect?

Face recognition is essential in everyday human life, and all faces are encountered in different poses. However, when a face is inverted, difficulties arise for recognition and eye movements may (Barton, Radcliffe, Cherkasova, Edleman, & Intriligator, 2006) or may not be disrupted (Williams & Henderson, 2007). The present study explored the effects of orientation and pose on recognition and eye movements during a standard old/new recognition task in order to resolve whether inversion disrupts eye movements. Eye-tracking data looked at the first fixations, the number of fixations, and the duration of fixations over a face. A standard inversion effect was observed, but the three-quarter view advantage was not observed. Eye-movement data revealed that the eyes were the most sampled feature (in terms of first fixation, number of fixations, and duration of fixation) for all upright faces, however, other features were sampled first for inverted faces. These results are consistent with Barton et al.'s (2006) but not Williams and Henderson's (2007) findings: possible explanations for this are discussed with the caveat that the same images were used from learning to test

First fixations in face processing: The more diagnostic they are the smaller the face-inversion effect

Hills, Ross, and Lewis (2011) introduced the concept that the face-inversion effect may, in part, be carried by the first feature attended to, since the first feature fixated upon is different for upright and inverted faces. An eye-tracking study that directly assesses this hypothesis by using fixation crosses to guide attention to the eye or mouth region of the to-be-presented upright and inverted faces was devised. Recognition was better when the fixation cross appeared at the eye region than at the mouth region. The face-inversion effect was smaller when the eyes were cued than when the mouth was cued or when there was no cueing. The eye-tracking measures confirmed that the fixation crosses attracted the first fixation but did not affect other measures of eye-movements. Furthermore, the location of the first fixation predicted recognition accuracy: when the first fixation was to the eyes, recognition accuracy was higher than when the first fixation was to the mouth, irrespective of facial orientation. The results suggest that the first facial feature attended to is more predictive of recognition accuracy than the face orientation in which they are presented