Psy 425 Exam 2

Front 1

eye gaze

Back 1

anger and joy= direct (approach)
fear and sadness= averted (avoidance)

Front 2

shared signal hypothesis

Back 2

shared value of eye gaze and emotion as signals of avoidance and approach

gaze direction influences emotion perception

emotional expression influences gaze direction perception

Front 3

stereotype activation

Back 3

top down influence
changes way see the face (when gender cues not given)
learned

Front 4

perceptual overlap

Back 4

potential bottom up influence
male/female appearance, features convey emotion value

Front 5

McArthur and emotional overgeneralization

Back 5

ecological theory
social impressions as adaptive functions and guided by typically accurate perceptions of ppl's traits as revealed thru physical features associated with age, sex, health and emotional state

Front 6

mental imagery

Back 6

expect similar appearance cues from face for expressing maleness, anger, maturity than for femaleness, fear, babyishness

Front 7

facial maturity

Back 7

emotion attributions to baby vs. mature faces similar to those of gender emotion stereotypes

fear faces: seen more honest, naive, dependent, youthful, feminine (like babyfaces)

anger faces: opposite, like mature faces

Front 8

study results of facial maturity

Back 8

-gender influences how efficiently anger and fear are recognized
-anger and fear expr. influence recognition of gender
-facial maturity influence sensitivity to gender discrimination
-emotion overgeneralization influence gender discrimination

Front 9

Baron-Cohen

Back 9

Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test- complex emotion mental state decoding

not been used in structurally normative populations to examine strictly functional differences ( tested Theory of mind with autism and aspbergers)

Front 10

cross culture variation

Back 10

cross-culture consistency in expression of basic emotions
subtle cross-cultural variation in expression of emotions

Front 11

adams et al. cross culture

Back 11

Japanese version of Eyes Test
=striking intracultural advantage for mental state attribution, despite longer response latencies for outgroup faces

Front 12

neural fMRI Japanese/ White

Back 12

increased activation of Superior Temporal Sulcus for ingroup vs. outgroup mental state decoding

unclear if due to cultural variation or own-race bias

Front 13

outgroup homogeneity

Back 13

when face part of outgroup, processed differently

ambiguous race--> how categorized predicts memory effects

other races- categorzied by race quickly and processed with fewer attentional resources than own-race, resulting in poor memory for outgroup

if classify face as ingroup, will remember it better--> may extend to emotional perception

Front 14

phenotypicality bias

Back 14

the more someone looks like member of a group, quicker and more intense identification of their stereotype

Front 15

asian american/ white task

Back 15

perhaps asian americans dont identify w/ either ingroup
white=racial outgroup
jap native= racial outgroup

Front 16

holistic face processing, race

Back 16

own-race bias and memory
own-race faces remember better and processed more holistically than other-race faces

Front 17

when split face..

Back 17

force feature-based processing, dont process as gestault
ingroup: interference to pick out individual features
outgroup:feature based

worse when looking at in-group faces

Front 18

arbitrary groups

Back 18

if white participants high psu pride, performed same level as japanese and white stimuli paired with penn state logo