A preference for genuine smiles following social exclusion

Research indicates that rejected individuals are better than others at discriminating between genuine (Duchenne) and deceptive (non-Duchenne) smiles (i.e., true versus false signals of affiliative opportunity). We hypothesized that rejected individuals would show a greater preference to work with individuals displaying Duchenne versus non-Duchenne smiles. To test this, participants wrote essays about experiences of inclusion, exclusion, or mundane events. They then saw a series of 20 videos of smiling individuals (10 with Duchenne and 10 with non-Duchenne smiles). Participants then indicated how much they would like to work with each target. Analyses revealed that compared to included and control participants, excluded individuals showed a greater preference to work with individuals displaying “real” as opposed to “fake” smiles. This effect was partially mediated by threats to “relational needs” (Williams, 2007) and fully mediated by threats to self-esteem. These results suggest that exclusion yields adaptive responses that could facilitate reconnection with others.     

Class, race, and the face: social context modulates the cross-race effect in face recognition

The current research investigates the hypothesis that the well-established cross-race effect (CRE; better recognition for same-race than for cross-race faces) is due to social-cognitive mechanisms rather than to differential perceptual expertise with same-race and cross-race faces. Across three experiments, the social context in which faces are presented has a direct influence on the CRE. In the first two experiments, middle-class White perceivers show superior recognition for same-race White faces presented in wealthy but not in impoverished contexts. The second experiment indicates this effect is due to the tendency to categorize White faces in impoverished contexts as outgroup members (e.g., "poor Whites"). In the third experiment, this effect is replicated using different ingroup and outgroup categorizations (university affiliation), with ingroup White faces being recognized better than outgroup White faces. In line with a social-cognitive model of the CRE, context had no influence on recognition for cross-race Black faces across the three experiments.