Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30376420›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of social psychology2019

At face value: Psychological outcomes differ for real vs. computer-generated multiracial faces.

Sarah E Gaither, Jacqueline M Chen, Kristin Pauker, Samuel R Sommers

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of social psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Chicago Face Database: Multiracial expansion.Behavior research methods · 2021
    Review
  5. Biracial Faces Offer Visual Cues of Successful Intergroup Contact: Genetic Admixture and Coalition Detection.Evolutionary psychology : an international journal of evolutionary approaches to psychology and behavior
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sarah E GaitherPsychology and Neuroscience, Duke University , Durham , USA.
Jacqueline M ChenPsychology Department, University of Utah , Salt Lake City , USA.
Kristin PaukerPsychology Department, University of Hawaii at Manoa , Honolulu , USA.
Samuel R SommersPsychology Department, Tufts University , Medford , USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiracial research emphasizes hypodescent categorizations and relies on computer-generated stimuli. Four experiments showed that real biracial faces in a 2-Choice categorization task (White, Black) elicited hypodescent more than computer-generated faces. Additionally, Experiment 2 showed a 2-Choice categorization task with real biracial faces increased racial essentialism more than a 3-Choice categorization task. Experiment 3 showed that mere exposure to real biracial faces did not increase essentialism. Finally, Experiments 4a and 4b replicated hypodescent outcomes when comparing real biracial faces to computer-generated versions of those same faces. In sum, these findings initiate a discussion surrounding the methodology of multiracial categorizations.

Indexed as

Facial RecognitionRacial GroupsSocial PerceptionThinkingAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultComputer-generated faceshypodescentmultiracial categorizationracial essentialismreal biracial faces

Identifiers

PMID30376420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.