![\"Unknown\"](\"http:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/files\/2015\/11\/Unknown.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Imagine that you are sitting in a coffee shop, peacefully eating your cannoli and sipping your latte. As you look out the window, you notice someone approach <\/p>\n In order to recognize a face, or any stimulus, someone must first encode that stimulus into their memory. Imagine that you are studying for a test. Encoding is the process of inputting the information that will be on\u00a0the test into your memory so that you can recall it later; in other words, the information on the test, or the stimulus, will be transcribed into a meaningful part of your memory system and then you will hopefully remember\u00a0it well later! How well do you recall information? That\u00a0varies widely\u00a0depending on whether encoding was intentional (on purpose, such as\u00a0studying for the test), or incidental (unexpected, such as\u00a0witnessing a crime). Encoding also varies when other environmental factors are demanding attention; it works best when someone\u2019s undivided attention is on the stimulus that they want to retrieve later. So, rather than looking at your cell phone and studying at the same time, you are best at encoding when you are focusing just on studying. (You can read a blog post about the impacts of cell phone use on your ability to remember and recall information\u00a0here<\/a>!)<\/p>\n Retrieval involves searching and finding a stored event in memory. It is impacted by how much someone rehearses the information they are trying to retrieve, as more rehearsal generally leads to better recall. So, the longer you study the information you need to know for that test, the better you will be at recalling it when test day rolls around. Recall is also negatively impacted by interference, or other information that comes into memory, as it gets in the way of the information that is being retrieved and therefore makes the retrieval process harder. So, if you were studying for a test and then \u00a0you attend several lectures before you took\u00a0the test, some of the information you learned in the lectures could get in the way of your ability to remember the information for the test.\u00a0Curtis et al. (2015) wanted to see if anxiety brought on before encoding impacted face recognition, or if it was more impactful when it occurred after encoding, but before retrieval.<\/p>\n Face recognition\u00a0is specialized because it is a holistic process that involves seeing a face as a whole rather than the sum of its parts.To recognize a face, we rely on configuration and how parts fit together, rather than what those individual parts are. It’s kind of like a puzzle. Rather than looking at all of the individual pieces, we look at how they all fit together to make the bigger picture. If we just focused on one piece of the puzzle, it would make no sense. And, just as you may be biased about what kind of puzzles you like to do, (scenes? animals? art?), face recognition is subjected to biases, such as the own-ethnicity bias. The own-ethnicity bias, researched by\u00a0many such as Gross (2009), suggests that people are better at recognizing faces that are of their own ethnic group. At least in part, this is thought to be because people are more familiar with their own ethnic group and have more interaction with people of their own race,\u00a0just as you have probably had more interaction\u00a0and are more\u00a0familiar with with \u00a0your favorite type of puzzle. Click here<\/a> to read the Gross (2009) article.<\/p>\n Keeping encoding, retrieval, and the own-ethnicity bias in mind, Curtis et al. (2015) sought to determine how anxiety impacts encoding and<\/strong> whether or not it impacts the own-ethnicity bias. Anxiety is characterized by increased physiological arousal and worry over future threats. They hypothesized\u00a0that anxiety prior to encoding would cause inaccuracies in retrieval, but they were not sure if anxiety induced after encoding, but before retrieval, would have the same effect. They also thought that anxiety would\u00a0increase the own-ethnicity bias, based on prior evidence that anxiety increases categorization\u00a0(Mikulincer et al. 1990), meaning that people who are anxious are more likely to include something in a certain category to make it easier to process. In the context of this study, an increase in categorization would lead to stereotyping in the own-ethnicity bias.\u00a0<\/strong>To test their hypotheses, they performed two experiments in which they manipulated when the onset of anxiety occurred.<\/p>\n In both experiments, participants, all of whom were Caucasian, were either placed in a control or anxiety condition. The anxiety condition’s aim was to induce state anxiety, which is considered to be\u00a0a current anxious affect, or \u00a0“in the moment” anxiety. Meanwhile, they wanted to make sure that trait anxiety, which is dispositional tendency or someone’s typical,\u00a0day-to-day anxiety level, was constant between all of their participants. To do this, the researchers performed a State Trait Anxiety Inventory before the encoding phase and after the retrieval phase (beginning and end of experiment) to ensure that anxiety induction was successful, and also to ensure that participants did not have different levels of trait anxiety.<\/p>\n Participants had to encode thirty faces. Fifteen of the faces\u00a0were African American males (“other-ethnicity”), while the other fifteen were Caucasian males (“own-ethnicity”). \u00a0They were presented in random order on a computer screen and cropped to remove distinguishable features, like so:<\/p>\n An example of what participants were doing during the task. This is an example of an “other-ethnicity” face, as the participant is Caucasian and the face is African American.<\/p><\/div>\n After a five\u00a0minute delay, participants entered the retrieval phase, where they were presented with sixty images, thirty of which had been presented during the encoding phase and thirty of which were “foils”, or images that had not been shown previously. Images that had been presented in the encoding phase were mirrored so that they were slightly different, but still the same face, like this:<\/p>\n An example of a mirrored face.<\/p><\/div>\n Each experiment induced anxiety at different time points and in different ways. In experiment one, state anxiety was induced prior to encoding<\/span> by telling participants that they were going to have to give a speech\u00a0on the \u201cpart of their body they were least happy with\u201d that would be recorded and evaluated by their peers, while the control group was told that they would anonymously evaluate speeches, but not have to give one\u00a0themselves. In experiment two, state anxiety was induced after encoding<\/span>, but before retrieval. Participants were given a series of anagrams after they had been presented with the first thirty faces.\u00a0The anagrams involved unscrambling words with a time constraint; half of the anagrams could not be solved, but the participants did not know that. The anxiety group was told that they would be required to complete additional anagrams if they did not perform well, and that footage would be shown to peers as an example of poor anagram-solving performance. The control group, however, was told not to worry if their performance was poor.<\/p>\n What the researchers found was rather surprising. In both experiments, the own-ethnicity bias was observed. Participants were more likely to say that they had seen other-ethnicity faces when they were presented in the retrieval phase, even if they had not been presented during encoding. This is called a \u201cfalse alarm\u201d. Additionally, they had higher “hit rates” for Caucasian faces, meaning that they were more accurate at recalling the faces of their own ethnicity. Interestingly, however, they found that anxiety impaired recognition, or led to higher false alarms, of all faces regardless of ethnicity, but only when anxiety was induced prior to encoding. Therefore, anxiety did not increase stereotypes or heighten the effect of the own-ethnicity bias, but it did make face recognition harder when induced prior to encoding. In other words, they found that anxiety made for poorer encoding which made for poorer retrieval, no matter the ethnicity of the face they were trying to retrieve!<\/p>\n Anxiety was defined earlier as worry Keep these findings\u00a0in mind\u00a0for anxiety-provoking situations that may require face recognition later. The next time you are eating a cannoli and drinking a latte and you see someone breaking into a car, take a few deep breaths and focus on the face. Try your best not to get anxious as you are observing. When you are done encoding, it is perfectly fine to panic! If you do this, you will be just as good as non-anxious people who are trying to recognize faces*!<\/p>\n To learn more about how face recognition can be biased, as it is with the own-ethnicity bias, read my peer\u2019s post called \u201cWho\u2019s That Chick? How You Identify and Recognize the Hotties Around You\u201d, which describes a study that found that people are better at recognizing others’ faces if they are familiar with their sexual orientation,\u00a0here<\/a>.<\/p>\n To read the original article, click here<\/a>.<\/p>\n *Research suggests that eyewitness testimony is not very good, especially if someone is of a different ethnicity, but that is a blog post for another day. See here<\/a> if you would like to read more about the own-ethnicity bias and face recognition.<\/p>\n References<\/strong><\/p>\n Curtis, G. J., Russ, A., & Ackland, C. (2015). More inaccurate but not more biased: Anxiety during encoding impairs face recognition accuracy but does not moderate the own\u2010ethnicity bias. Applied Cognitive Psychology<\/em>, 29<\/em>(4), 621-627.<\/p>\n Gross, T. F. (2009). Own-ethnicity bias in the recognition of Black, East Asian, Hispanic, and White faces. Basic And Applied Social Psychology<\/em>, 31<\/em>(2), 128-135.<\/p>\n Malpass, R. S., & Kravitz, J. (1969). Recognition for faces of own and other race. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,<\/em> 13<\/em>, 330\u2013334.<\/p>\n Mikulincer, M., Kedem, P., & Paz, D. (1990). Anxiety and categorization\u20141. The structure and boundaries of mental categories. Personality and Individual Differences, 11<\/em>, 805\u2013814.<\/p>\n Images (in order of appearance):<\/strong><\/p>\n My Anxieties Have Anxieties<\/a>\u00a0Retrieved November 22, 2015.<\/p>\n Question Mark Faces <\/a>Retrieved November 22, 2015.<\/p>\n Face Recognition<\/a>\u00a0Retrieved November 22, 2015.<\/p>\n
\na parked car, smash the window, and steal something out of the front seat of the car. Your calm afternoon quickly becomes anxiety-ridden: your leg bounces, your voice shakes, your heart pounds, your stomach churns, and your mind races.\u00a0You catch a glimpse of the criminal\u2019s face as they are running off, and you promptly call 911. But did you know that the anxiety that you experienced when witnessing the crime\u00a0could impact your ability to remember the criminal\u2019s face later? We tend to recognize faces pretty easily, especially when someone is familiar to us, so\u00a0you’re probably thinking that you would also be able to recognize the criminal’s\u00a0face without a problem. After all, you did<\/em> just watch them commit a crime right in front of your eyes. ![\"PAFF_090513_anxietyperception_newsfeature\"](\"http:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/files\/2015\/11\/PAFF_090513_anxietyperception_newsfeature.jpg\")
\u00a0Your anxiety about the situation may have impaired your ability to recognize that person’s face, though,\u00a0and a\u00a0recent study conducted by Curtis, Russ, and Ackland (2015) sought to determine why and how this happens. Their research wanted to see how a spike in\u00a0anxiety impacts\u00a0someone’s ability to remember a face. More specifically, they wanted to know when the time of onset of anxiety is most impactful (before or after seeing a face) and whether or not anxiety increases stereotypes, or assumptions about the thoughts, actions, and behaviors another group of people, when someone is recognizing a face that is a different ethnicity than their own.<\/p>\n![\"Screen-Shot-2015-01-30-at-12.48.31-PM\"](\"http:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/files\/2015\/11\/Screen-Shot-2015-01-30-at-12.48.31-PM-580x333.png\")
<\/a>![\"assymetry\"](\"http:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/files\/2015\/11\/assymetry.jpg\")
<\/a>![\"tumblr_lntq558sN41qjbquzo1_500\"](\"http:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/files\/2015\/11\/tumblr_lntq558sN41qjbquzo1_500.jpg\")
over future threats.\u00a0In experiment 1, the participants were distracted by thoughts of giving a speech because they feared the threat of later embarrassment. Their anxiety made it harder for them to encode the faces they were viewing, just as a distraction when studying for a test makes it harder to encode the material you are learning. As a result of the poor encoding, it was harder to recognize faces later.\u00a0In experiment 2, there was nothing causing them to be anxious while they were\u00a0encoding the faces, so participants\u00a0were successfully able to put depictions of the faces into their memory, just as you are\u00a0better able to put information into your memory for a test if you are\u00a0not distracted when studying. Then, even though participants\u00a0were anxious when they were trying to recognize the faces, they were equally as good at it\u00a0as participants who were not anxious.<\/p>\n