Externalizing Visual Images
Examining the Accuracy of Facial Descriptions vs. Composites as a Function of the Own-Race Bias
Abstract
Abstract. Two studies investigated whether the recall accuracy of facial details would differ depending on recall method, and also explored the own-race/ethnic bias in face recall. In Experiment 1, Hispanic participants (N = 120) viewed either a Hispanic or a White face and then were asked to recall the face by either giving a physical description or constructing a facial composite. Independent judges then determined the accuracy of the recalled information in both a rating task and a matching task. Results revealed reliably higher accuracy scores for the descriptions over the facial composites but showed no evidence for an own-race bias. A second experiment (N = 120) was conducted to attempt to replicate the description-advantage effect and to further explore the own-race bias in a stronger test using Black faces as the cross-ethnic group. This experiment again showed a description advantage and provided some evidence for an own-race bias in recall similar to that found in the facial recognition literature. Directions for future research based on the current findings are discussed.
References
(1998). Human memory: Theory and practice. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.
(2006). The influence of race on eyewitness memory. In R. Lindsay, D. Ross, J. Read, & M. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology (pp. 257-281). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(1968). Spacial and verbal components in the act of recall. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 22, 349– 368
(1990). Face recognition. In M.W. Eysenck (Ed.), Cognitive psychology: An international review. (pp. 221-263). London: Wiley Ltd.
(1981). Photofit constructions versus verbal descriptions of faces. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 358– 363
(1987). Recognition of facial stimuli following an intervening task involving the Identi-kit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 488– 491
(1998). FACES: The ultimate composite picture (Version 3.0) [Computer software]. Quebec, Canada: Saint Hubert.
(1981). Face recall systems. In G. Davies, H. Ellis, & J. Shepherd (Eds.), Perceiving and remembering faces (pp. 227-250). London: Academic Press.
(1986). The recall and reconstruction of faces: Implications for theory and practice. In H.D. Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe, & A. Young (Eds.), Aspects of face processing (pp. 388-397). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
(1978). Remembering faces: Acknowledging our limitations. Journal of the Forensic Science Society, 18, 19– 24
(2006). Facial composites: Forensic utility and psychological research. In R. Lindsay, D. Ross, J. Read, & M. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology (pp. 59-86). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(1975). Descriptions of White and Black faces by White and Black subjects. International Journal of Psychology, 10, 119– 123
(2002). Why can't we just get along? Interpersonal biases and interracial distrust. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 8, 88– 102
(1984). Practical aspects of face memory. In G. Wells & E. Loftus (Eds.), Eyewitness testimony: Psychological perspectives (pp. 2-37). New York: Cambridge University Press.
(1986). Face recall: A psychological perspective. Human Learning, 5, 189– 196
(1979). Recall of White and Black faces by White and Black witnesses using the Photofit system. Human Factors, 21, 55– 59
(1975). An investigation of the use of the Photofit technique for recalling faces. British Journal of Psychology, 66, 409– 426
(1995). The verbal vulnerability of perceptual expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1608– 1623
(1989). Making faces: Developmental trends in the construction and recognition of Photofit facial composites. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 10, 131– 145
(2004). EvoFIT: A holistic, evolutionary facial imaging technique for creating composites. ACM Transactions on Applied Psychology (TAP), 1, 1– 21
(1979). Does fluency of face description imply superior face recognition?. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 13(1), 15– 18
(1985). Contamination of facial memory through exposure to misleading composite pictures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 164– 176
(2006). Use of facial composite systems in U.S. law enforcement agencies. Psychology, Crime, and Law, 12, 505– 517
(2001a). A meta-analysis of the verbal overshadowing effect in face identification. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 15, 603– 616
(2001b). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 3– 35
(2006). Person descriptions as eyewitness evidence. In R. Lindsay, D. Ross, J. Read, & M. Toglia (Eds.), Handbook of eyewitness psychology (pp. 1-34). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(1985). Relationship between accuracy of prior description and facial recognition. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 547– 555
(1988). Cross-racial/ethnic eyewitness identification: A field study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 972– 984
(1989). Expertise and configural coding in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 80, 313– 331
(1990). Verbal overshadowing of visual memories: Some things are better left unsaid. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 36– 71
(1988). Face perception and the right hemisphere. In L. Weiskrantz (Ed.), Thought without language (pp. 108-131). New York: Oxford University Press.
(1996). Face recall - methods and problems. In S.L. Sporer, R.S. Malpass, & G. Köhnken (Eds.), Psychological issues in eyewitness identification(pp. 87-115). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(2000). Social and cognitive factors affecting the own-race bias in Whites. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 22, 71– 84
(1988). Long-term improvement of facial recognition through visual rehearsal. In M.M. Gruneberg, P.E. Morris, & R.N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory (pp. 182-188). London: Wiley.
(1996). Psychological aspects of person descriptions. In S.L. Sporer, R.S. Malpass, & G. Köhnken (Eds.), Psychological issues in eyewitness identification(pp. 53-86). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
(1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 225– 245
(1997). Features and their configuration in face recognition. Memory and Cognition, 25, 583– 592
(July, 1999). Evaluation of an eigenface-based composite system. Paper presented at Meetings of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, Boulder, CO.
(2000). Projections of the resident population by race, Hispanic origin, and nativity: Middle series, 2001 to 2005. NP-T5-B. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics, and Statistical Administration, Census Bureau.
(1984). Memory for faces: Encoding and retrieval operations. Memory & Cognition, 12, 338– 344
(2001). The other-race effect in eyewitness identification: What do we do about it?. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(1), 230– 246
(1987). What is the best way to encode faces?. In M.M. Gruneberg, P.E. Morris, & R.N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects of memory: Current research & issues (pp. 163-168). New York: Wiley.
(1991). Effects of postexposure description and imaging on subsequent face recognition performance. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society, 35, 575– 579
(2003). Interracial contact and the own-race bias for face recognition in South Africa and England. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 365– 373
