Own Race Bias and the Memory of Faces

Abstract

Own race bias and the memory of faces has been a topic under study for quite some time. It is undeniable that the phenomenon exists. Different mechanisms exist to perpetuate this phenomenon. Own race bias as an influential force in the memory of faces has been tested exhaustively in the present and in the past, and it is not going away anytime soon. Cognitive processes indicate different neural cues that perpetuate own-race and cross-race biases and their effects on facial memory. People tend to recognize faces of their own race and misremember faces of people of other races. Social processes also influence the perpetuation of this phenomenon. One thing is certain: own race bias will prevail as long as people tend to surround themselves with members of their own race cross-culturally while also continuing to look in the mirror and recognize the distinct features of their socially constructed race.

Own-Race Bias and the Memory of Faces

Social scientists and psychologists have questioned what functions and mechanisms serve to perpetuate the own race bias in memory retention for faces, or better yet, the cross-racial identification phenomenon when remembering faces. In general, psychologists have agreed for decades that the phenomenon is very real and affects various aspects of our society. By reviewing one dated study that investigated decade’s worth of research into the phenomenon as well as 2 more recent cognitive psychological studies investigating the mechanisms behind own-race bias in memory retention of faces, several implications can be discussed. In general, it can be argued that own-race bias exists when it comes to memory consolidation and retention and the recognition of faces, and both social and cognitive processes contribute to this accepted and undeniable phenomenon cross-culturally.

First of all, reviewing the social and cognitive arguments supporting the notion of own race bias in facial memory retention is important in understanding the undeniable presence of the phenomenon. Christian Meissner and John Brigham’s longitudinal and exhaustive review of the studies on own-race biases in facial memory suggest implications for more recent studies on the matter (2001). Meissner and Brigham investigated over 39 research articles and reviewed the reliability as well as the validity of the studies, the reliability across the studies, and generalizability of the studies and the similarly/differentially administered memory tasks assigned to over 5,000 participants across studies under review (2001, pp. 3-5). 3 studies under review in Meissner and Brigham’s study suggested that approximately 80% of respondents in three studies demonstrated significant own race bias in which the respondents indicated that faces of their own race yielded better recognition while other studies under review suggested moderate effects of own race bias recognition and memory retention of faces (2001, pp. 3-5). Additionally, studies under Meissner and Brighams’ review used a standardized paradigm, and respondents were tasked with recognizing and discriminating faces already shown and novel faces, or distractions (2001, p. 5). While criticisms have arisen on this standard recognition paradigm because it does not test other memory tasks, researchers have responded by presenting the presence of the own race bias effect across different measures such as reaction time and ‘facial reconstruction tasks’ (Meissner & Brigham 2001, p.5). Therefore, at the time of publication, it had been shown across 39 studies that the own race bias prevails across different memory tasks for facial recognition, which clearly has social and cognitive implications for memory retention at the time of writing as well as the present.

While there might be differences in the ways in which own race bias in the memory of faces is manifest across racial groups and ethnicities, the own race bias exists cross-culturally. According to Herzmann et al., people are still exceedingly better at recognizing faces of their own race and ethnicity, although Caucasians showed a stronger neural correlate with the ‘other race effect’, meaning that less neural activity was associated with improved memory retention of Caucasian faces than of Asian faces in this 2 tiered study of the own race bias effect on memory (Herzman et al., 2011, p. 3105). Regardless, the study’s use of event-related potentials suggests that the own-race bias is more naturalized and that other-race facial recognition is a more involved process that includes more cognitive encoding (Herzmann et al., 2011). Therefore, this more current study suggests that, to this day, it is more difficult and involves more cognitive processes to successfully recognize faces of another race for both Caucasians and Asians and that the recognition of other race faces is far less successful when it comes to viewing other race faces once again.

The arguments have been made that there are clear neural cognitive processes that have been proven to exist when it comes to own-race bias when it comes to remembering and recognizing faces. However, there are certain social processes that influence the distortions of memory that further imply that own-race biases are resultant of understandably cognitive functions but also social functions in society that influence cognitive processes.

For example, painful memories of violent or stressful events are assumed to be confidently recorded in our minds (Lacy& Stark 2013, 649). Unfortunately, this is not the case, and own-race bias often influences many racist phenomena that occur in society. For example, in 1971 five black men known as the “Quincy Five” were wrongfully convicted of murder in Florida thanks to eyewitness testimony that was assumed by the courts to be accurate (Meissner & Brigham 2001). When five eyewitnesses identified the men as the culprits and were supposedly unprejudiced witnesses, how could they not convict these men? Memories often fail us, and memories are often distorted by misperceptions. The legal system has been slow to implement changes that put different amounts of weight on eyewitness testimonies (Lacy& Stark 2013).

Additionally, it must be understood that the general public, including juries, is often unaware of own-race bias as well as cross-race bias, alluding to reduced accuracy when remembering and identifying faces that are different from one’s own race (Lacy& Stark, 2013, p.649). Also, it is generally understood and accepted that people tend to have interactions day to day within their own racial or ethnic groups, contributing to own-race bias. The more faces one sees of a particular race, the more likely one is to recognize distinct features of individuals within that race. That being said, increased experiences with other races can reduce the cross-race bias significantly (Lacy& Stark, 2013, p.649). Therefore, social processes influence our cognitive processes and own race biases, and therefore, own-race bias prevails to this day with likely little change in the accuracy of own-race bias tests since the 2001 Meissner and Brigham exhaustive review on own-race bias and cross-race bias.

In conclusion, own-race bias exists and will continue to exist. Its presence is demonstrated by neural processes that can be measured, the accuracy of accepted testing paradigms on facial memory and other aspects of memory retention, and the social forces that influence cognitive processes that contribute to own-race bias. Own race bias takes place often unconsciously and isn’t necessarily an implication of racism or racist ideology at all. However, even unprejudiced individuals demonstrate own-race bias due to the mirror effect, recognizing faces and facial features similar to their own, which also is characteristic of distinct racial features. While the race is a socially constructed phenomenon, physical features, upbringing, and cognitive processes contribute to the continuation of own-race bias in facial recognition in society.

References

Herzmann, G., Willenbockel, V., Tanaka, J. W., & Curran, T. (2011). The neural correlates of memory encoding and recognition for own-race and other-race faces. Neuropsychologia, 49(11), 3103-3115.

Lacy, J. W., & Stark, C. E. (2013). The neuroscience of memory: Implications for the courtroom. Neuroscience and the Law - Science and Society, 14, 649-658.

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(1), 3-35.