Exact(16)
Both passive-viewing groups showed the expected recognition bias, but divergent patterns were observed in the identity-matching groups.
If the recognition bias for prosocial faces observed in experiment 1 was strong and reliable, it should also be observed in a four-alternative forced-choice recognition task.
The last experiments showed that face recognition bias can be modulated by the wording in behavioral descriptors in a social exchange scenario.
In addition, it was shown that SAD patients present a recognition bias with respect to threatening or critical facial expressions [63] [66].
The recognition tasks used in this experiment were the same as in Experiment 1. Modified yes-no task: There was a significant recognition bias to tagged faces, F(2.59,152.54) = 13.65, p<.001, η2 = .21 (Figure 3a).
Momentary assessment for recognition bias reduction.
Similar(44)
Collectively, these results suggest that categorization-individuation processes do not play the same role in explaining the two recognition biases.
Short descriptors only: Recognition biases were strongly dampened and accuracy for all tagged faces tended to be more similar than in the priming experiment, F 3,57) = 2.68, p = .055.055
The recognition biases towards prosocial faces observed in Experiment 1 was confirmed with a different paradigm, F 2,56) = 5.23, p = .008, η2 = .16.16
It was hypothesized that recognition biases would be eliminated by clearly alerting participants to the presence of cheating and cooperative behaviors prior testing.
Questionnaire, long and short descriptors: The recognition biases observed in experiments 1 and 2 disappeared with this setup, F 3,90) = 1, p = .36.36
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com