ArticleJournal of experimental social psychology2019
Explicit Categorization Goals Affect Attention-Related Processing of Race and Gender During Person Construal.
Article in Journal of experimental social psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Black and Latiné Faces Capture Early Attention Measured by the P2 ERP Component: Departure From Whiteness as a Source of Salience.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Dissociable impacts of perceived race and ascribed status in event-related brain potentials and multivariate network activity.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- How Educational Background Influences Recruitment Evaluation: Evidence from Event-Related Potentials.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Within-person dynamics of attention to race and expression of race bias: a real-time test of the self-regulation of prejudice model.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2025Article
- Trial-level ERPs predicted behavioral responses during self-referential processing in late childhood.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2024Article
- The role of task demands in racial face encoding.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A Functional Coupling of Brain and Behavior During Social Categorization of Faces.Personality & social psychology bulletin · 2021Article
- Using multilevel models for the analysis of event-related potentials.International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Faces are categorized by gender and race very quickly, seemingly without regard to perceivers' goals or motivations, suggesting an automaticity to these judgments that has downstream consequences for evaluations, stereotypes, and social interactions. The current study investigated the extent to which early neurocognitive processes involved in the categorization of faces vary when participants' tasks goals were to categorize faces by race or by gender. In contrast to previous findings, task-related differences were found, such that differentiation in the P2 event-related potential (ERP) according to perceived gender was facilitated by having an explicit task goal of categorizing faces by gender; however, the P2 was sensitive to race regardless of task goals. Use of principal components analysis (PCA) revealed two underlying components that comprised the P2 and that were differentially sensitive to the gender and race of the faces, depending on participants' top-down task goals. Results suggest that top-down task demands facilitate discrimination of faces along the attended dimension within less than 200 ms, but that the effect of top-down task demands may not be evident when examining early ERP components that reflect more than one distinct underlying process.
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.