ArticleFrontiers in psychology2019
Toward a New Approach to Cross-Cultural Distinctiveness and Typicality of Human Faces: The Cross-Group Typicality/ Distinctiveness Metric.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-reported aggressiveness does not follow facial masculinization in diverse South Asian populations.PNAS nexus · 2026Article
- Self-reported social media use does not affect cross-cultural consensus in first impressions.Evolutionary human sciences · 2026Article
- Facial basis of stereotypes: Judgements of warmth and competence based on cross-group typicality/distinctiveness of faces.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2025Article
- Visual attention to faces during attractiveness and dominance judgements.Evolutionary human sciences · 2025Article
- Sexual Dimorphism: The Interrelation of Shape and Color.Archives of sexual behavior · 2024Article
- Race and statistics in facial recognition: Producing types, physical attributes, and genealogies.Social studies of science · 2023Article
- Enhanced source memory for cheaters with higher resemblance to own-culture typical faces.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Article
- Does the primate face cue personality?Personality neuroscience · 2023Article
- Africans and Europeans differ in their facial perception of dominance and sex-typicality: a multidimensional Bayesian approach.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Perception-driven dynamics of mimicry based on attractor field model.Interface focus · 2021Article
- Cross-cultural perception of female facial appearance: A multi-ethnic and multi-centre study.PloS one · 2021Article
- Facial attractiveness and preference of sexual dimorphism: A comparison across five populations.Evolutionary human sciences · 2021Article
- Oxidative stress as a hidden cost of attractiveness in postmenopausal women.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the present research, we took advantage of geometric morphometrics to propose a data-driven method for estimating the individual degree of facial typicality/distinctiveness for cross-cultural (and other cross-group) comparisons. Looking like a stranger in one's home culture may be somewhat stressful. The same facial appearance, however, might become advantageous within an outgroup population. To address this fit between facial appearance and cultural setting, we propose a simple measure of distinctiveness/typicality based on position of an individual along the axis connecting the facial averages of two populations under comparison. The more distant a face is from its ingroup population mean toward the outgroup mean the more distinct it is (vis-à-vis the ingroup) and the more it resembles the outgroup standards. We compared this new measure with an alternative measure based on distance from outgroup mean. The new measure showed stronger association with rated facial distinctiveness than distance from outgroup mean. Subsequently, we manipulated facial stimuli to reflect different levels of ingroup-outgroup distinctiveness and tested them in one of the target cultures. Perceivers were able to successfully distinguish outgroup from ingroup faces in a two-alternative forced-choice task. There was also some evidence that this task was harder when the two faces were closer along the axis connecting the facial averages from the two cultures. Future directions and potential applications of our proposed approach are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.