Among a crowd of distractor faces, threatening or angry target faces are identified more quickly and accurately than are nonthreatening or happy target faces, a finding known as the “face in the crowd effect.” Two perceptual explanations of the effect have been proposed: (1) the “target orienting” hypothesis (i.e., threatening targets orient attention more quickly than do nonthreatening targets and (2) the “distractor processing” hypothesis (i.e., nonthreatening distractors paired with a threatening target are processed more efficiently than vice versa, leading to quicker detection of threatening targets). Using a task, with real faces and multiple identities, the current study replicated the face in the crowd effect and then, via eye tracking, found greater support for the target orienting hypothesis. Across both the classical search asymmetry paradigm (i.e., one happy target in a crowd of angry distractors vs. one angry target in a crowd of happy distractors) and the constant distractor paradigm (i.e., one happy target in a crowd of neutral distractors vs. one angry target in a crowd of neutral distractors), fewer distractors were fixated before first fixating angry targets relative to happy targets, with no difference in the processing efficiency of distractors. These results suggest that the face in the crowd effect on this task is supported to a greater degree by attentional patterns associated with properties of target rather those of the crowd.
References
[1]
Horstmann G, Bauland A (2006) Search asymmetries with real faces: Testing the anger superiority effect. Emotion 6: 193–207. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.6.2.193
[2]
？hman A, Lundqvist D, Esteves F (2001) The face in the crowd revisited: A threat with schematic stimuli. J Pers Soc Psychol 80: 381–396. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.381
[3]
Pinkham AE, Griffin M, Baron R, Sasson NJ, Gur RC (2010) The face in the crowd effect: Anger superiority when using real faces and multiple identities. Emotion 10: 141–146 doi:10.1037/a0017387.
[4]
Fox E, Damjanovic L (2006) The eyes are sufficient to produce a threat superiority effect. Emotion 6: 534–539. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.6.3.534
Fox E, Lester V, Russo R, Bowles RJ, Pichler A, et al. (2000) Facial expressions of emotion: Are angry faces detected more efficiently? Cogn Emot 14: 61–92. doi: 10.1080/026999300378996
[7]
Juth P, Lundqvist D, Karlsson A, ？hman A (2005) Looking for foes and friends: Perceptual and emotional factors when finding a face in the crowd. Emotion 5: 379–395. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.5.4.379
[8]
Damjanovic L, Roberson D, Athanasopoulos P, Kasai C, Dyson M (2010) Searching for Happiness Across Cultures. J Cogn Cult 10: 85–107 doi:10.1163/156853710X497185.
[9]
Williams MA, Moss SA, Bradshaw JL, Mattingley JB (2005) Look at me, I'm smiling: Visual search for threatening and nonthreatening facial expressions. Vis Cogn 12: 29–50. doi: 10.1080/13506280444000193
[10]
Becker D, Anderson US, Mortensen CR, Neufeld SL, Neel R (2011) The face in the crowd effect unconfounded: Happy faces, not angry faces, are more efficiently detected in single- and multiple-target visual search tasks. J Exp Psychol Gen 140: 637–659 doi:10.1037/a0024060.
[11]
Calvo MG, Nummenmaa L (2008) Detection of emotional faces: Salient physical features guide effective visual search. J Exp Psychol Gen 137: 471–494 doi:10.1037/a0012771.
[12]
Ceccarini F, Caudek C (2013) Anger superiority effect: The importance of dynamic emotional facial expressions. Vis Cogn 21: 498–540 doi:10.1080/13506285.2013.807901.
[13]
Frischen A, Eastwood JD, Smilek D (2008) Visual search for faces with emotional expressions. Psychol Bull 134: 662. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.5.662
[14]
Horstmann G, Lipp OV, Becker SI (2012) Of toothy grins and angry snarls—Open mouth displays contribute to efficiency gains in search for emotional faces. J Vis 12: 1–15 doi:10.1167/12.5.7.
[15]
Mermillod M, Vermeulen N, Lundqvist D, Niedenthal PM (2009) Neural computation as a tool to differentiate perceptual from emotional processes: The case of anger superiority effect. Cognition 110: 346–357 doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.11.009.
[16]
Lundqvist D, Juth P, ？hman A (2013) Using facial emotional stimuli in visual search experiments: The arousal factor explains contradictory results. Cognition Emotion: In press.
[17]
Ekman P, Friesen WV (1978). Manual of the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
[18]
Pinkham AE, Sasson NJ, Simpson CE, Healey K, Kohler C (2014) An intact threat superiority effect for non-social but not social stimuli in schizophrenia. J Abnorm Psychol: In press.
[19]
Damjanovic L, Pinkham AE, Clarke P, Phillips J (2013) Enhanced threat detection in experienced riot police officers: Cognitive evidence from the face-in-the-crowd effect. Q J Exp Psychol: In press.
[20]
Reynolds MG, Eastwood JD, Partanen M, Frischen A, Smilek D (2008) Monitoring eye movements while searching for affective faces. Vis Cogn 17: 318–333 doi:10.1080/13506280701623704.
[21]
Eastwood JD, Smilek D, Oakman JM, Farvolden P, van Ameringen M, et al. (2005) Individuals with social phobia are biased to become aware of negative faces. Vis Cogn 12: 159–179. doi: 10.1080/13506280444000175
[22]
Sasson NJ, Pinkham AE, Richard J, Hughett P, Gur RE, et al. (2010) Controlling for response biases clarifies sex and age differences in facial affect recognition. J Nonverbal Behav 34: 207–221. doi: 10.1007/s10919-010-0092-z
[23]
Elfenbein HA, Ambady N (2002) On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion recognition: A meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 128: 203–235. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.128.2.203
[24]
Lepp？nen JM, Tenhunen M, Hietanen JK (2003) Faster choice-reaction times to positive than to negative facial expressions: The role of cognitive and motor processes. J Psychophysiol 17: 113–123. doi: 10.1027//0269-8803.17.3.113
[25]
Belopolsky AV, Devue C, Theeuwes J (2011) Angry faces hold the eyes. Vis Cogn 19: 27–36 doi:10.1080/13506285.2010.536186.
[26]
Hampton C, Purcell DG, Bersine L, Hansen CH (1989) Probing ‘pop-out’: Another look at the face-in-the-crowd effect. Bull Psychon Soc 27: 563–566. doi: 10.3758/bf03334670
[27]
Purcell DG, Stewart AL (2010) Still another confounded face in the crowd. Atten Percept Psychophys 72: 2115–2127 doi:10.3758/APP.72.8.2115.
[28]
Findlay JM (1997) Saccade target selection during visual search. Vision Res 37: 617–631. doi: 10.1016/s0042-6989(96)00218-0
[29]
Williams DE, Reingold EM, Moscovitch M, Behrmann M (1997) Patterns of eye movements during parallel and serial visual search tasks. Can J Exp Psychol 51: 151–164. doi: 10.1037/1196-1961.51.2.151
Gur RC, Sara R, Hagendoorn M, Marom O, Hughett P, et al. (2002) A method for obtaining 3-dimensional facial expressions and its standardization for use in neurocognitive studies. J Neurosci Meth 115: 137–143. doi: 10.1016/s0165-0270(02)00006-7
[32]
Turatto M, Galfano G (2000) Color, form and luminance capture attention in visual search. Vision Res 40: 1639–1643. doi: 10.1016/s0042-6989(00)00061-4
[33]
Salvucci DD, Goldberg JH (2000) Identifying fixations and saccades in eye-tracking protocols. In: Proceedings of the Eye Tracking Research and Applications Symposium. New York: ACM Press. pp. 71–78.
[34]
Hariri AR, Bookheimer SY, Mazziotta JC (2000) Modulating emotional responses: Effects of a neocortical network on the limbic system. Neuroreport 11: 43–48. doi: 10.1097/00001756-200001170-00009
[35]
？hman A, Mineka S (2001) Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning. Psychol Rev 108: 483–522. doi: 10.1037//0033-295x.108.3.483
[36]
Shen J, Reingold EM (2001) Visual search asymmetry: The influence of stimulus familiarity and low-level features. Percept Psychophys 63: 464–475. doi: 10.3758/bf03194413
