Young children learn first impressions of faces through social referencing

The influence of fake news on face-trait learning

Humans spontaneously attribute a wide range of traits to conspecifics based on their facial appearance. Unsurprisingly, previous findings indicate that this 'person evaluation' is affected by information provided about the target's past actions and behaviours. Strikingly, many news items shared on social media sites (e.g., Twitter) describe the actions of individuals who are often shown in accompanying images. This kind of material closely resembles that encountered by participants in previous studies of face-trait learning. We therefore sought to determine whether Twitter posts that pair facial images with favourable and unfavourable biographical information also modulate subsequent trait evaluation of the people depicted. We also assessed whether the effects of this information-valence manipulation were attenuated by the presence of the "disputed tag", introduced by Twitter as a means to combat the influence of fake-news. Across two preregistered experiments, we found that fictional tweets that paired facial images with details of the person's positive or negative actions affected the extent to which readers subsequently judged the faces depicted to be trustworthy. When the rating phase followed immediately after the study phase, the presence of the disputed tag attenuated the effect of the behavioural information (Experiment 1: N = 128; Mage = 34.06; 89 female, 36 male, 3 non-binary; 116 White British). However, when the rating phase was conducted after a 10-minute delay, the presence of the disputed tag had no significant effect (Experiment 2: N = 128; Mage = 29.12; 78 female, 44 male, 4 non-binary, 2 prefer not to say; 110 White British). Our findings suggest that disputed tags may have relatively little impact on the long-term face-trait learning that occurs via social media. As such, fake news stories may have considerable potential to shape users' person evaluation.

How cues to social categorization impact children's inferences about social categories

Social categorization involves two crucial processes: First, children seek properties on which they can categorize individuals, i.e., they learn to form social categories; then children make inferences based on social category membership and might develop affective responses toward social categories. Over the last decade, a growing number of research in developmental psychology started to use novel social categories to investigate how children learn and reason about social categories. To date, three types of cues have been put forward as means to form social categories, namely linguistic, visual, and behavioral cues. Based on social category membership, children draw inferences about the shared properties of social category members and about how social category members ought to behave and interact with each other. With additional input, children might apply essentialist beliefs to social categories and develop affective responses toward social categories. This article aims to provide key insights on the development of stereotypes and intergroup biases by reviewing recent works that investigated how children learn to form novel social categories and the kind of inferences they make about these novel social categories.

Why is the literature on first impressions so focused on White faces?

We spontaneously attribute to strangers a wide variety of character traits based on their facial appearance. While these first impressions have little or no basis in reality, they exert a strong influence over our behaviour. Cognitive scientists have revealed a great deal about first impressions from faces including their factor structure, the cues on which they are based, the neurocognitive mechanisms responsible, and their developmental trajectory. In this field, authors frequently strive to remove as much ethnic variability from stimulus sets as possible. Typically, this convention means that participants are asked to judge the likely traits of White faces only. In the present article, we consider four possible reasons for the lack of facial diversity in this literature and find that it is unjustified. Next, we illustrate how the focus on White faces has undermined scientific efforts to understand first impressions from faces and argue that it reinforces socially regressive ideas about 'race' and status. We go on to articulate our concern that opportunities may be lost to leverage the knowledge derived from the study of first impressions against the dire consequences of prejudice and discrimination. Finally, we highlight some promising developments in the field.