title: Development of face scanning for own- and other-race faces in infancy.
abstract: The present study investigated whether infants visually scan own- and other-race faces differently as well as how these differences in face scanning develop with age. A multi-method approach was used to analyze the eye-tracking data of 6- and 9-month-old Caucasian infants scanning dynamically displayed own- and other-race faces. We found that 6-month-olds showed differential fixation, fixating significantly more on the left eye and mouth of own-race faces, but more on the nose of other-race faces. Infants at 9 months of age fixated more on the eyes of own-race faces, but more on the mouth of other-race faces. A scan path analysis revealed that infants shifted their attention between the eyes of the own-race faces significantly more frequently than for other-race faces. Overall, younger and older infants responded differentially to own- versus other-race faces not only in the absolute amount of time spent fixating specific features, but also on their fixation shifts between features.
authors.affiliation: University of Toronto, Canada.
authors.forename: Wen S
authors.initials: WS
authors.lastname: Xiao
authors.affiliation: University of Toronto, Canada.
authors.forename: Naiqi G
authors.initials: NG
authors.lastname: Xiao
authors.affiliation: University of Delaware, USA.
authors.forename: Paul C
authors.initials: PC
authors.lastname: Quinn
authors.affiliation: University of London, UK.
authors.forename: Gizelle
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Anzures
authors.affiliation: University of Toronto, Canada.
authors.forename: Kang
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Lee
keywords: eye-tracking; face processing; other-race effect
references.citation: Cognition. 2004 Aug;93(1):B1-9
references.pmid: 15110726
references.citation: Child Dev. 1976 Jun;47(2):523-7
references.pmid: 1269319
references.citation: Perception. 2002;31(9):1109-21
references.pmid: 12375875
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2010 Jul;13(4):553-64
references.pmid: 20590720
references.citation: Infancy. 2009 Jul 8;14(4):474-487
references.pmid: 32693451
references.citation: Infancy. 2007;11(1):87-95
references.pmid: 18974853
references.citation: PLoS One. 2011 Apr 13;6(4):e18621
references.pmid: 21533235
references.citation: J Exp Child Psychol. 2011 Jan;108(1):180-9
references.pmid: 20708745
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2002 Jun 1;6(6):255-260
references.pmid: 12039607
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jan 31;109(5):1431-6
references.pmid: 22307596
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2005 Nov;8(6):F31-6
references.pmid: 16246233
references.citation: Child Dev. 1996 Oct;67(5):1940-51
references.pmid: 9022223
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2007 Dec;18(12):1084-9
references.pmid: 18031416
references.citation: J Vis. 2005 Oct 05;5(9):659-67
references.pmid: 16356076
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2010 Oct;117(4):1168-87
references.pmid: 20822290
references.citation: PLoS One. 2008 Aug 20;3(8):e3022
references.pmid: 18714387
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2006 Feb;17(2):159-63
references.pmid: 16466424
references.citation: PLoS One. 2012;7(6):e37688
references.pmid: 22675486
references.citation: Behav Res Methods. 2011 Sep;43(3):864-78
references.pmid: 21512875
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2007 Sep;18(9):763-7
references.pmid: 17760769