Abstract:Eye movement strategies employed by humans to identify conspecifics are not universal. Westerners predominantly fixate the eye region during face recognition, whereas Easterners consistently focus more on the nose, yet recognition accuracy is comparable (Blais et al., 2008). However, the face literature has robustly shown that the critical information for face recognition is located in the eyes and partially the mouth, but not the nose. Moreover, since eye movements in natural viewing conditions do not provide unequivocal evidence on the measure of the visual information being used by observers, the question of whether humans universally use similar facial information to recognize faces remains unresolved. To address this issue, we monitored eye movements during face recognition of thirty Western Caucasian (WC) and thirty East Asian (EA) observers with a novel technique that parametrically restricts information outside central vision. We used ‘Spotlights’ with Gaussian apertures of 2°, 5° or 8° dynamically centered on observers' fixations. Face recognition performance improved with increasing Spotlight apertures. Regardless of culture, observers actively fixated the eyes and mouth with constrained Spotlights (2°, 5°). In the 8° condition, information from both eyes and mouth was simultaneously available when fixating the nose and, as expected, only EA observers shifted their fixations towards this region. This central location is optimal to integrate information globally, a cultural marker of Easterners' perceptual strategies. WC observers engage in analytic strategies and their facial feature-by-feature strategy was not affected by Spotlight apertures. Social experience and cultural factors shape the way humans think about the world and regulate the strategies used to extract information from faces. However, these external forces do not modulate the information used to solve this critical biological feat. Human beings rely on identical facial information to recognize conspecifics, a universal law dictated by the evolutionary constraints of nature and not nurture.

(Eye-) Tracking the Other-Race Effect: Comparison of Eye Movements During Encoding and Recognition of Ingroup Faces With Proximal and Distant Outgroup Faces

Face Recognition Subserves Nature Not Nurture

Investigating Cultural Diversity for Extrafoveal Information Use in Visual Scenes.

Mapping Face Recognition Information Use across Cultures.

When East Meets West: Gaze-Contingent Blindspots Abolish Cultural Diversity in Eye Movements for Faces

Putting Culture Under The 'Spotlight' Reveals Universal Information Use For Face Recognition

An eye for the I: Preferential attention to the eyes of ingroup members.

Waldo Reveals Cultural Differences in Return Fixations

Individuating and categorizing faces: The other-race effect is reduced by attending to racial but not identity cues

Through the eyes of the own-race bias: Eye-tracking and pupillometry during face recognition

Ingroup and outgroup differences in face detection

Eye-tracking the own-race bias in face recognition: Revealing the perceptual and socio-cognitive mechanisms

The Other-Race and Other-Species Effect during a Sex Categorization Task: An Eye Tracker Study

Perceptual Processes in the Cross-Race Effect: Evidence From Eyetracking

Closing a conceptual gap in race perception research: A functional integration of the other-race face recognition and "who said what?" paradigms.

Differences in Looking at Own- and Other-Race Faces Are Subtle and Analysis-Dependent: An Account of Discrepant Reports

Emotional facial perception development in 7, 9 and 11 year-old children: The emergence of a silent eye-tracked emotional other-race effect

The other-race effect and holistic processing across racial groups

EXPRESS: Eye Movement Differences when Recognising and Learning Moving and Static Faces

Studies on the Other-race Effect in Face Recognition

The other‐ethnicity effect in facial recognition of Tibetan and Han individuals: Evidence from behavioural and eye‐movement data