Attractiveness of own-race, other-race, and mixed-race faces

Averaged face composites, which represent the central tendency of a familiar population of faces, are attractive. If this prototypicality contributes to their appeal, then averaged composites should be more attractive when their component faces come from a familiar, own-race population than when they come from a less familiar, other-race population. We compared the attractiveness of own-race composites, other-race composites, and mixed-race composites (where the component faces were from both races). In experiment 1, Caucasian participants rated own-race composites as more attractive than other-race composites, but only for male faces. However, mixed-race (Caucasian/Japanese) composites were significantly more attractive than own-race composites, particularly for the opposite sex. In experiment 2, Caucasian and Japanese participants living in Australia and Japan, respectively, selected the most attractive face from a continuum with exaggerated Caucasian characteristics at one end and exaggerated Japanese characteristics at the other, with intervening images including a Caucasian averaged composite, a mixed-race averaged composite, and a Japanese averaged composite. The most attractive face was, again, a mixed-race composite, for both Caucasian and Japanese participants. In experiment 3, Caucasian participants rated individual Eurasian faces as significantly more attractive than either Caucasian or Asian faces. Similar results were obtained with composites. Eurasian faces and composites were also rated as healthier than Caucasian or Asian faces and composites, respectively. These results suggest that signs of health may be more important than prototypicality in making average faces attractive.     

Repetition effects in associative false recognition: Theme-based criterion shifts are the exception, not the rule

Previous reports have demonstrated that false memory for the critical items of associative lists decreases when lists are studied multiple times (Benjamin, 2001). In three experiments, we explored two hypotheses that might account for false memory reductions with repetition. Under an identification hypothesis, repetition decreases false memory because participants realise that critical items are absent from the list at encoding and thus reject them at test. Under a criterion shift hypothesis, repetition decreases false memory because it increases the discriminability of studied words from lures, causing participants to set a higher response criterion for positive recognition responses. Results uniquely supported the criterion shift hypothesis. Furthermore, results showed that participants only changed their criterion on separate recognition tests, not on an item-by-item basis within a single recognition test. The failure to establish separate criteria within a test increased false memory for repeated lists.     

Revision and Restandardization of the Conners Teacher Rating Scale (CTRS-R): Factor Structure, Reliability, and Criterion Validity

The Conners Teacher Rating Scale (CTRS) is a commonly used research and clinical tool for assessing children's behavior in the classroom. The present study introduces the revised CTRS (CTRS-R) which improves on the original CTRS by (1) establishing normative data from a large, representative North American sample, (2) deriving a factor structure using advanced statistical techniques, and (3) updating the item content to reflect current conceptualizations of childhood disorders. Using confirmatory factor analysis, a six-factor structure was found which includes Hyperactivity-Impulsivity, Perfectionism, Inattention/Cognitive Problems, Social Problems, Oppositionality, and Anxious/Shy factors. The reliability of the scale, as measured by test-retest correlations and internal consistency, is generally satisfactory. Using all of the scale factors to discriminate between attention deficit hyperactivity disordered and normal children, 85 percent of children were correctly classified, supporting the validity of the scale and indicating excellent clinical utility. Similarities and differences between the original CTRS factor structure and the CTRS-R factor structure are discussed.