Advertisement

Outgroup faces hamper word recognition

  • Simone Sulpizio
  • Eduardo NavarreteEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

The present study explores socio-cultural priming in native-language processing. Caucasian Italian native speakers completed a written lexical decision task. Written stimuli were preceded by either a prime “white” face (ingroup condition) or a prime “black” face (outgroup condition). Face priming effects were observed in three experiments using different stimuli. Participants were slower in categorizing words, but not non-words, when preceded by an outgroup face than by an ingroup face. Several psycholinguistic variables were manipulated to localize the levels of processing that are affected by socio-cultural prime. The lack of effect with non-word items excludes the possibility that the face priming effect arises at perceptual or attentive levels of processing. In addition, we observed that while the face priming effect does not interact with lexical dimensions, it does interact with a semantic dimension such as imageability. The results indicate that social categories extracted from faces may modulate lexico-semantic processing. Interestingly, such a modulation would occur in the context of a quick and automatic process like visual word recognition in a person’s native language.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Giorgia Giovanardi and Daniela di Menza for their help in data collection and Caterina Suitner for her helpful comments on a previous version of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain clinical studies or patient data. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Ambady, N., Bernieri, F. J., & Richeson, J. A. (2000). Toward a histology of social behavior: Judgmental accuracy from thin slices of the behavioral stream. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 32, 201–271.Google Scholar
  2. Amodio, D. M. (2014). The neuroscience of prejudice and stereotyping. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15, 670–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balota, D. A., & Chumbley, J. I. (1984). Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 340.Google Scholar
  4. Barca, L., Burani, C., & Arduino, L. S. (2002). Word naming times and psycholinguistic norms for Italian nouns. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 424–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2015). Parsimonious mixed models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.04967.
  6. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., Walker, S., Christensen, R. H. B., & Singmann, H. (2015). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4, 2014. R package version, 1(4), 1–23.Google Scholar
  7. Burani, C., Arduino, L. S., & Barca, L. (2007). Frequency, not age of acquisition, affects Italian word naming. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(6), 828–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burani, C., Paizi, D., & Sulpizio, S. (2014). Stress assignment in reading Italian: Friendship outweighs dominance. Memory & Cognition, 42, 662–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cassidy, B. S., Krendl, A. C., Stanko, K. A., Rydell, R. J., Young, S. G., & Hugenberg, K. (2017). Configural face processing impacts race disparities in humanization and trust. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 111–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Castelli, L., Zogmaister, C., & Tomelleri, S. (2009). The transmission of racial attitudes within the family. Developmental Psychology, 45, 586–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Costa, A., Foucart, A., Hayakawa, S., Aparici, M., Apesteguia, J., Heafner, J., & Keysar, B. (2014). Your morals depend on language. PLoS One, 9, e94842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Costa, A., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2014). How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(5), 336–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crepaldi, D., Keuleers, E., Mandera, P., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). SUBTLEX-IT. http://crr.ugent.be/subtlex-it/.
  14. Della Rosa, P. A., Catricalà, E., Vigliocco, G., & Cappa, S. F. (2010). Beyond the abstract-concrete dichotomy: Mode of acquisition, concreteness, imageability, familiarity, age of acquisition, context availability, and abstractness norms for a set of 417 Italian words. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 1042–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dellantonio, S., & Job, R. (2017). The concreteness of the body. A revision of the classical perspective on concrete and abstract terms. Sistemi intelligenti, 29, 9–32.Google Scholar
  16. Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2011). A dynamic interactive theory of personal construal. Psycholological Review, 118, 247–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garrod, S., & Pickering, M. J. (2004). Why is conversation so easy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 8–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Cera, C., & Sandoval, T. C. (2008). More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism, and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(3), 787–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grainger, J., Declerck, M., & Marzouki, Y. (2017). On national flags and language tags: Effects of flag-language congruency in bilingual word recognition. Acta Psychologica, 178, 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hutchings, P. B., & Haddock, G. (2008). Look Black in anger: The role of implicit prejudice in the categorization and perceived emotional intensity of racially ambiguous faces. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1418–1420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Izura, C., & Ellis, A. W. (2004). Age of acquisition effects in translation judgement tasks. Journal of Memory and Language, 50(2), 165–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jared, D., Poh, R. P. Y., & Paivio, A. (2013). L1 and L2 picture naming in Mandarin-English bilinguals: A test of bilingual dual coding theory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 383–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Keysar, B., Hayakawa, S. L., & An, S. G. (2012). The foreign-language effect: Thinking in a foreign tongue reduces decision biases. Psychological Science, 23, 661–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kubota, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Phelps, E. A. (2012). The neuroscience of race. Nature Neuroscience, 15, 940–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuperman, V., Estes, Z., Brysbaert, M., & Warriner, A. B. (2014). Emotion and language: valence and arousal affect word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1065–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li, Y., Yang, J., Scherf, K. S., & Li, P. (2013). Two faces, two languages: An fMRI study of bilingual picture naming. Brain and Language, 127, 452–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McGurk, H., & MacDonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meissner, C. A., & Brigham, J. C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy and Law, 7, 3–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Michel, C., Corneille, O., & Rossion, B. (2007). Race categorization modulates holistic face encoding. Cognitive Science, 31(5), 911–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Minear, M., & Park, D. C. (2004). A lifespan database of adult facial stimuli. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 630–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Molnar, M., Ibáñez-Molina, A., & Carreiras, M. (2015). Interlocutor identity affects language activation in bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 81, 91–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Munhall, K. G., Jones, J. A., Callan, D. E., Kuratate, T., & Vatikiotis-Bateson, E. (2004). Visual prosody and speech intelligibility: Head movement improves auditory speech perception. Psychological Science, 15(2), 133–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Perea, M., Rosa, E., & Gómez, C. (2005). The frequency effect for pseudowords in the lexical decision task. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 67, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sulpizio, S., Toti, M., Del Maschio, N., Costa, A., Fedeli, D., Job, R., & Abutalebi, J. (2019). Are you really cursing? Neural processing of taboo words in native and foreign language. Brain and Language, 194, 84–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sumner, M., Kim, S. K., & King, K. B. M. (2013). The socially weighted encoding of spoken words: a dual-route approach to speech perception. Frontiers in psychology, 4, 1015.Google Scholar
  39. Tajfel, H. (1979). Individuals and groups in social psychology. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 18, 183–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. https://www.R-project.org/.
  41. Van Selst, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 631–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vigliocco, G., Meteyards, L., Andrews, M., & Kousta, S. (2009). Toward a theory of semantic representation. Language and Cognition, 1–2, 219–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wheeler, M. E., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). Controlling racial prejudice: Social-cognitive goals affect amygdala and stereotype activation. Psychological Science, 16, 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Woumans, E., Martin, C. D., Vanden Bulcke, C., Van Assche, E., Costa, A., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Duyck, W. (2015). Can faces prime a language? Psychological Science, 26, 1343–1352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhang, S., Morris, M. W., Cheng, C. Y., & Yap, A. J. (2013). Heritage-culture images disrupt immigrants’ second-language processing through triggering first-language interference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 11272–11277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facoltà di PsicologiaUniversità Vita-Salute San RaffaeleMilanItaly
  2. 2.Centro di Neurolinguistica e PsicolinguisticaUniversità Vita-Salute San RaffaeleMilanItaly
  3. 3.Dipartimento di Psicologia dello Sviluppo e della SocializzazioneUniversità di PadovaPaduaItaly

Personalised recommendations