Search

According to a widely accepted definition, visual objects are composed of features that occupy different levels in the object's hierarchical structure and can be classified as either global or local, depending on their location in the hierarchy (e.g., Kinchla, 1974, 1977; Navon, 1977, 1981). The globality of a visual property corresponds to the place it occupies in the hierarchy: Properties at the top of the hierarchy are more global than those at the bottom, which in turn are more local. In a typical global-local task, participants are shown a large letter (e.g., a large ‘H’) constructed from the same\different small letters (e.g., small ‘H’s). The results point to a faster response to the large letter and slower response to the small letters when they conflict with the large letter, suggesting that the visual system prioritizes the global structure of the stimulus. The global-precedence hypothesis claims that global properties of a visual object are processed first, followed by analysis of local properties (Navon, 1977, 1981a, 1981b; but note that local precedence may occur under specific task conditions, for example, see Hughes, Fendrich & Reuter-Lorenz, 1990). Although the cognitive mechanisms that are associated with racism have been studied extensively, the hierarchical processing of race-related information has not been addressed to the best of our knowledge. In order to fill this gap, the aim of the current study is to examine the hierarchical processing of race as a function of the individual level of racism. To this end, participants will perform two novel computerized tasks set to measure the processing of faces' global property (race) as well as local properties, or component parts (glasses). Task 1 ("finding a rule in a series") will include an indirect measure of hierarchical processing. Task 2 ("modification of the global\local paradigm") will include a direct measure of hierarchical processing. Furthermore, participants will perform Navon’s (1977) classic task before or after the completion of the two measures of hierarchical processing (in a counterbalanced manner). At the end of the experiment, participants' level of racism will be measured in both implicit and explicit ways: for the implicit measurement, participants will complete the Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT), in the race version (Sriram, Greenwald, 2009). For the explicit measure, participants will complete the Modern Racism Scale (MRS; McConahay, Hardee & Batts, 1980). Furthermore, we will assess the explicit racial bias by directly asking the participants for their racial preference (Axt, 2018). The studies will be performed online, via Prolific platform (https://app.prolific.co/; see Palan & Schitter, 2018). In all studies, inclusion criteria are subjects from White/Caucasian ethnic origin, over the age of 18, without glasses, currently residing in the United States. “Finding the rule behind the sequence game” :Indirect measure of hierarchical processing: 1. Practice: participants are told that they will undergo a practice stage. The instructions are presented with a series of four images. The participants are told that the series has only one rule, which they need to identify. In each trial, the participant is presented with two additional images, only one fits the rule. The participants are asked to press the right arrow if they think the image on the right fits the rule, and to press the left arrow if they think the image on the left fits the rule. In the practice stage, participants are presented with a series of blue squares. For 3 trials, they are presented with two additional images- an orange shape which is not a square (e.g., circle), or an orange square. The correct answer is the orange square. On the 4th trial, participants are presented with an orange square and a blue triangle. Since there is only one rule/pattern to identify, the correct answer is necessarily the one compliant with the shape (i.e., square) and not the color (i.e., blue). We will examine whether the participants understood the rule by calculating the accuracy of the 4th trial. 2. Task: The task itself is also divided in to four stages: 2.1. Practice (4 trials): Following the practice stage, participants will be presented with a series of four human faces, all from the same race, who are wearing glasses. The first 10 trials are practice trials, in which only one image fits both hierarchical interpretations (i.e., the matching race with glasses) while the second image does not fit any hierarchical interpretation (i.e., the other-race without glasses). In the practice stage participants receive feedback indicating that the former image is the correct one. 2.2. Pre-critical (10 trials): The practice proceeds to the "Pre-critical" stage, which includes 10 trials presenting one image that matches both the global and local interpretations and one image that does not match any interpretation, identical to the practice trials, only without feedback. Participants are not aware that this is a pre-critical stage. 2.3. Critical stage (20 trials): Then, without alerting the participant, the target images change such that one image fits only the global interpretation (i.e., matching race, but without glasses), while the second image fits only the local interpretation (i.e., the other race, with glasses). This "critical" stage includes 20 trials, wherein a proportion of choices greater than 68.7% favoring one of the interpretations (global or local) indicates a greater-than-chance preference for the respective interpretation (based on 95% confidence interval, see data analysis for additional information). Hence, the task has a total of 34 trials. The main dependent measure is the interpretation the participants will favor in the post-critical stage – whether the global or the local. There are two conditions for the task: one with white race as the global interpretation (i.e., series of white people with glasses, see Fig 1), and the second condition with black race (i.e., series of black people with glasses). Participants will perform only one condition (conditions will be counterbalanced across participants). The stimuli in the task will include images from the NimStim database (Tottenham et al., 2009). Figure 1 An illustration of the “critical” stage in Task 1: participants choose the left image if they think that the rule is race and choose the right image if that think that the rule is glasses. Note that in the task four images appear in the upper line. Here we present only three images due to copyrights of the NimStim dataset. 2.4. Question: At the end of task 1, participants will be presented with the following question: What was the rule? 1. Race 2. Glasses 3. Race + Glasses 4. None This stage constitutes a manipulation check, to make sure that the participants’ choice of either the local or global interpretation corresponded to their self-reports. The order of the three options will be randomized (the “None” option will remain at fourth place). From this task, we will extract the following measures: 1) Practice accuracy: we will analyze the participants’ accuracy in the final practice trial (number 4) in order to determine whether the participant understood the instructions. 2) Global bias: we will extract the number of choices in the global interpretation in the critical phase, and then calculate the confidence interval of this measure to determine whether the participant’s preference was global or local or none\both. Direct measure of global bias: In this task, participants are presented with pictures of faces with different races (black\white), with one of two distinctive local features (with\without glasses). In each trial only one face is presented, at the center of the screen. This task is divided into two blocks: in the Global Target block, participants are asked to press the ”I” key when the race is black, and press the “E” key when the race is white. In the Local Target block, participants are asked to press the ”I” key when the person has one of the local features (e.g., the face is with glasses), and press the “E” key when the person has the other local feature (e.g., no glasses). Each block is presented twice: once with the direction of the response as described above, and again with the opposite direction (i.e., the “I” and the “E” keys switch). The order of the direction of the response is determined randomly. Therefore, there are 4 blocks in total. Participants are asked to respond as quickly and accurately as possible. Each block includes 4 practice trials (with feedback) and 25 experimental trials (without feedback), resulting in 216 trials for the task overall. The main dependent measure is the comparison between reaction time (RT) to a global target versus a local target. The stimuli in the task include images from the NimStim database (Tottenham et al., 2009). Fig. 2. An example of a trial in the global block of the direct measure of hierarchical processing. BIAT measure (Sriram, Greenwald, 2009): The Implicit Association Task (IAT) is a widely used measure of implicit racial bias (Greenwald, McGhee & Schwartz, 1998). In a standard IAT, participants are asked to rapidly categorize two target concepts with two attributes. The Brief IAT (BIAT) is a shorter version of the IAT, also extensively used in studies examining racial bias. In this task, participants categorize one target concept and one attribute together, and other concepts and attributes as “everything else”. In the race version of the BIAT, the participant is presented with items representing two concepts (black people, white people), and two attributes: good words (e.g., "Beautiful") and bad words (e.g., "Criminal"). In each trial only one item is presented. The task is divided into two blocks: in block 1, the participant is asked to press the right key (i.e., the letter “I” key on a keyboard) when the item is either a picture of a black person or a good word, and to press the left key (i.e., the letter “E” key on the keyboard) for all other items. In block 2, the participant is asked to press the right key when presented with a white person or a good word, and to press the left key for anything else. The block order is randomized. Furthermore, each block will begin with 4 practice trials which will be eventually excluded from the analysis. The protocol in the current study corresponds to the one described in Nosek, Bar-Anan, Sriram, Axt and Greenwald (2014). Navon classical task (Navon, 1977, 1981): The task includes presentation of a large capital letter (H or S) composed of small capital letters: either congruent or incongruent to the large letter (see Fig 3). In each trial, participants view one of these letters and are asked to respond as fast and as accurately as possible to one of the hierarchical levels while ignoring the other. In the global condition, participants are asked to identify the large letter, whereas in the local condition, they are asked to identify the small letters. The procedure is similar to the modified version of this task (task 2): in each trial, the image appears until the participant responds. If the participant provides an inaccurate response, a red X appears until the correct response is provided. The blocks order will be determined in a random manner. Each block includes 10 practice trials, followed by 100 trials (i.e., each stimulus is presented 25 times), resulting in 220 trials for the task. Fig. 3. All the stimuli presented in the Navon’s task. An explicit question of racial preference (Axt, 2018): The study by Axt (2018) demonstrated that the best way to measure explicit racism is by directly asking the participants for their racial bias, using the following item: Which statement best describes you? I strongly prefer Black people to White people, I moderately prefer Black people to White people, I slightly prefer Black people to White people, I prefer Black people and White people equally, I slightly prefer White people to Black people, I moderately prefer White people to Black people, I strongly prefer White people to Black people The participant receives a score ranging from 1 (weak racial bias) to 7 (strong racial bias). Explicit racism measurement: The Modern Race Schedule (MRS): The Modern Racism Scale (MRS; McConahay, Hardee & Batts, 1980) is a relatively nonreactive scale of racial attitudes. The MRS consists of 7 items worded as opinion statements rated on the following Likert-type scale: +2 (agree strongly), +1 (agree somewhat), 0 (neither agree nor disagree or no opinion), -1 (disagree somewhat), and -2 (disagree strongly). An experiment conducted by McConahey (1983) provided strong support for the construct validity of the Modern Racism Scale as a measure of racial prejudice. It is easy to understand the anger of black people in America. Black people have more influence upon school desegregation plans than they ought to have. Black people are getting too demanding in their push for equal rights. Over the past few years black people have gotten more economically than they deserve. Over the past few years the government and news media have shown more respect to black people than they deserve. Black people should not push themselves where they're not wanted. Discrimination against black people is no longer a problem in the United States. Demographic questions: At the end of the study, participants will be asked the following questions: 1. Gender Man Woman Non-binary/third gender 2. Age 3. Dominant hand Right Left Both 4. Race or ethnic origin White, not Hispanic origin Black, not Hispanic origin Hispanic Asian Native American or Alaskan native Other Unsure 5. Do you use glasses or contact lenses? Yes No 6. Where would you place yourself along the political spectrum? A scale ranging from Extremely conservative (1) to extremely liberal (7) 7. Are you Pro-Life or Pro-Choice? Pro-Life Pro-Choice NA/Rather not say 8. In general, what is your political affiliation? Democrat Republican Independent Other None 9. Do you support or oppose Black Lives Matter movement? Strongly support Somewhat support Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Rather not say 10. Do you participate in regular religious activities? Yes. Both public and private Yes. Public only Yes. Private only None/Rather not say 11. What is your employment status? Full-Time Part-Time Unemployed (and job seeking) Not in paid work (e.g. homemaker', 'retired or disabled) Other 12. Which of these is the highest level of education you have completed? No formal qualifications Secondary education (e.g. GED/GCSE) High school diploma/A-levels Technical/community college Undergraduate degree (BA/BSc/other) Graduate degree (MA/MSc/MPhil/other) Doctorate degree (PhD/other) Don't know / not applicable 13. What is your total household income per year, including all earners in your household (after tax) in USD? Less than $10000 $10000–$15999 $16000–$19999 $20000–$29999 $30000–$39999 $40000–$49999 $50000–$59999 $60000–$69999 $70000–$79999 $80000–$89999 $90000–$99999 $100000–$149999 More than $150000 14. Think of a scale as representing where people stand in society. At the top (10) are the people who are best off—those who have the most money, most education and the best jobs. At the bottom (0) are the people who are worst off—who have the least money, least education and the worst jobs or no job. Where would you put yourself on the scale? Choose the number whose position best represents where you would be on this scale. 15. In which US state you currently live? Although the cognitive mechanisms that are associated with racism have been studied extensively, the hierarchical processing of race-related information has not been addressed to the best of our knowledge. In order to fill this gap, the aim of the current study is to examine the hierarchical processing of race as a function of the individual level of racism. To this end, participants will perform two novel computerized tasks set to measure the processing of faces' global property (race) as well as local properties, or component parts (glasses). Task 1 ("finding a rule in a series") will include an indirect measure of hierarchical processing. Task 2 ("modification of the global\local paradigm") will include a direct measure of hierarchical processing. Furthermore, participants will perform Navon’s (1977) classic task before or after the completion of the two measures of hierarchical processing (in a counterbalanced manner). At the end of the experiment, participants' level of racism will be measured in both implicit and explicit ways: for the implicit measurement, participants will complete the Brief Implicit Association Test (BIAT), in the race version (Sriram, Greenwald, 2009). For the explicit measure, participants will complete the Modern Racism Scale (MRS; McConahay, Hardee & Batts, 1980). Furthermore, we will assess the explicit racial bias by directly asking the participants for their racial preference (Axt, 2018). The studies will be performed online, via Prolific platform (https://app.prolific.co/; see Palan & Schitter, 2018). In all studies, inclusion criteria are subjects from White/Caucasian ethnic origin, over the age of 18, without glasses, currently residing in the United States.

Studies suggest that there exists an interaction between a-priori expectancies and attention bias toward threat, as threat detection can override endogenous attention control driven by expectancy. Specifically, while expectancy influences the detection of neutral stimuli, it does not aid nor hinder the detection of spiders. The current study will focus on the temporal dynamics of the relationship between expectancy and attention toward threat, to better understand the mechanisms underlying the prioritization of threat detection. In the proposed event-related potentials (ERP) experiment we will manipulate a priori expectancy and measure attention bias, using a well-validated paradigm. To this aim, a visual search array will be presented, with one of two possible targets: spiders (threatening) or birds (neutral). A verbal cue stating the likelihood of encountering a target will precede the array, thus creating congruent and incongruent trials. Following cue presentation, preparatory processes will be examined using the contingent negative variation (CNV). Following target presentation, two components will be measured: early posterior negativity (EPN) and late positive potential (LPP), as these components reflect early and late stages of natural selective attention toward emotional stimuli, respectively. Based on our previous findings, we expect these components to reveal differences between: (1) spider and bird cues; (2) spider and bird targets; (3) congruent and incongruent trials.