Articlei-Perception
Impaired configural processing for other-race faces revealed by the Thatcher illusion.
Article in i-Perception. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Thatcher illusion, where participants perceive upright faces with inverted eyes and mouth as grotesque but are markedly impaired in detecting grotesqueness when the entire faces are inverted, is commonly interpreted as reflecting disrupted configural and/or holistic processing in inverted faces. Previous research has suggested that other-race faces may be processed with a comparatively reduced reliance on configural (and more featural) information than own-race faces. The own-race bias refers to the tendency to recognise faces from a more familiar morphological group - mostly the own 'race' - faster and with higher accuracy than faces from less familiar groups. The present study tried to identify differences in processing own- and other-race faces (Thatcherised or not) across seven orientations ranging from 0° to 180° in 30° steps. For own-race faces, reaction times (RTs) to Thatcherised stimuli descriptively followed a sigmoidal function with a marked increase around 120° rotation, reflecting a typical reduced efficiency of configural processing once faces were rotated by more than 90°. For other-race faces, RTs increased more gradually and approximately linearly across orientations, consistent with reliance on featural processing. Accuracy was lowest for Thatcherised other-race faces with a steep decline starting between 30° and 60° of rotation. Overall, the results suggest a processing advantage for own-race faces that may rely more strongly on configural processing, whereas other-race faces appear to be processed with comparatively greater reliance on feature-based strategies.
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.