The Headscarf Effect: Direct Evidence from the Eyewitness Identification Paradigm

Internal and external features dominate familiar and unfamiliar face recognition, respectively. However, this finding is not universal; Egyptians showed a robust internal‐feature advantage for processing unfamiliar faces (Megreya & Bindemann, 2009). This bias was speculatively attributed to their long‐term experiences for individuating female faces with headscarves, which completely cover the external features. Here, we provided an empirical test for this suggestion. Participants from Egypt and UK were presented with a staged crime, which was committed by an own‐race woman with or without a headscarf. All participants were then asked to identify the culprit from a line‐up involving 10 faces with or without headscarves. British participants showed an advantage when the culprit left her hair uncovered. In contrast, Egyptian observers showed an advantage when the culprit wore a headscarf. This Egyptian headscarf effect was also replicated using British faces, suggesting that it reflects a specific characteristic of participant nationality rather than face nationality. These results therefore provide evidence for how culture influences cognition. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Multi-Informant Assessment of High-Achieving Students’ Behavioral and Emotional Strengths

Journal of Child and Family Studies - Multi-informants, such as parents and teachers, are commonly considered as resources when evaluating students’ emotional and behavioral skills. This...     

Personnel selection in the digital age: a review of validity and applicant reactions,and future research challenges

ABSTRACT

We present a targeted review of recent developments and advances in digital selection procedures (DSPs) with particular attention to advances in internet-based techniques. By reviewing the emergence of DSPs in selection research and practice, we highlight five main categories of methods (online applications, online psychometric testing, digital interviews, gamified assessment and social media). We discuss the evidence base for each of these DSP groups, focusing on construct and criterion validity, and applicant reactions to their use in organizations. Based on the findings of our review, we present a critique of the evidence base for DSPs in industrial, work and organizational psychology and set out an agenda for advancing research. We identify pressing gaps in our understanding of DSPs, and ten key questions to be answered. Given that DSPs are likely to depart further from traditional non-digital selection procedures in the future, a theme in this agenda is the need to establish a distinct and specific literature on DSPs, and to do so at a pace that reflects the speed of the underlying technological advancement. In concluding, we, therefore, issue a call to action for selection researchers in work and organizational psychology to commence a new and rigorous multidisciplinary programme of scientific study of DSPs.