MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153566944 · doi:10.4236/psych.2014.519210

The Other-Race Effect in Caucasian and Japanese-Descendant Children in Brazil: Evidence of Developmental Plasticity

2014· article· en· W2153566944 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ana Carolina Monnerat Fioravanti-Bastos, Alberto Filgueiras, J. Landeira-Fernández

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPsychologyRace (biology)DescendantDevelopmental psychologyContext (archaeology)Face (sociological concept)Early childhoodGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Other-Race Effect has been confirmed by several experimental studies, in which the individual has greater difficulty in recognizing the faces of races that are different from their own. Few studies have investigated this effect during the development of the face processing system. The aim of this study was to investigate the development of the Other-Race Effect in Caucasian and Japanese-descendants children born and living in Brazil. Seventy-four children, split into two age groups (5 - 7 and 9 - 11 years of age), were tested. Japanese-descendant children did not present the effect in favor of their own-race faces, whereas Caucasian children demonstrated the effect in both age groups. This indicates that the effect is present early in the development of face recognition and that contact with the faces of another race during childhood dissipates it. These findings suggest that experience with faces from the children’s visual context is crucial for shaping face processing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychologySame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207