Does self-construal shape automatic social attention?

We examined whether activating independent or interdependent self-construal modulates attention shifting in response to group gaze cues. European Canadians (Study 1) and East Asian Canadians (Study 2) primed with independence vs. interdependence completed a multi-gaze cueing task with a central face gazing left or right, flanked by multiple background faces that either matched or mismatched the direction of the foreground gaze. Results showed that European Canadians (Study 1) mostly ignored background gaze cues and were uninfluenced by the self-construal primes. However, East Asian Canadians (Study 2), who have cultural backgrounds relevant to both independence and interdependence, showed different attention patterns by prime: those primed with interdependence were more distracted by mismatched (vs. matched) background gaze cues, whereas there was no change for those primed with independence. These findings suggest activating an interdependent self-construal modulates social attention mechanisms to attend broadly, but only for those who may find these representations meaningful.

How robust is the own-group face recognition bias? Evidence from first- and second-generation East Asian Canadians.

There is mounting evidence that North Americans are better able to remember faces of targets who belong to the same social group, and this is true even when the social groups are experimentally created. Yet, how Western cultural contexts afford the development of this own group face recognition bias remains unknown. This question is particularly important given that recent findings suggest that first-generation East Asian Canadians do not show this bias. In the current research, we examined the own-group bias among first- and second-generation East Asian Canadians, who vary systematically in their exposure to and engagement in a Western cultural context, and tested mediators that could explain any difference. In Study 1, second-generation East Asian Canadians showed better memory for same-group (vs. other-group) faces. In Studies 2 and 3, as well as a meta-analysis of all three studies, we found some additional evidence that second-generation East Asian Canadians show better memory for same-group (vs. other-group) faces, whereas first-generation East Asian Canadians do not, but only when each cultural group was examined separately in each study, as no interaction with generational status emerged. In Study 2, and in a higher powered pre-registered Study 3, we also examined whether second- (vs. first-) generational status had a positive indirect effect on same-group face recognition through the effects of acculturation and perceived relational mobility in the immediate social environment, however this mediation model was not supported by the data. Overall, the results provide some additional evidence that the effect of mere social categorization on face recognition may not be as consistently found among East Asian participants.

Culture moderates the relationship between interdependence and face recognition.

Recent theory suggests that face recognition accuracy is affected by people's motivations, with people being particularly motivated to remember ingroup versus outgroup faces. In the current research we suggest that those higher in interdependence should have a greater motivation to remember ingroup faces, but this should depend on how ingroups are defined. To examine this possibility, we used a joint individual difference and cultural approach to test (a) whether individual differences in interdependence would predict face recognition accuracy, and (b) whether this effect would be moderated by culture. In Study 1 European Canadians higher in interdependence demonstrated greater recognition for same-race (White), but not cross-race (East Asian) faces. In Study 2 we found that culture moderated this effect. Interdependence again predicted greater recognition for same-race (White), but not cross-race (East Asian) faces among European Canadians; however, interdependence predicted worse recognition for both same-race (East Asian) and cross-race (White) faces among first-generation East Asians. The results provide insight into the role of motivation in face perception as well as cultural differences in the conception of ingroups.

Aging, culture, and memory for categorically processed information.

OBJECTIVES: Literature on cross-cultural differences in cognition suggests that categorization, as an information processing and organization strategy, was more often used by Westerners than by East Asians, particularly for older adults. This study examines East-West cultural differences in memory for categorically processed items and sources in young and older Canadians and native Chinese with a conceptual source memory task (Experiment 1) and a reality monitoring task (Experiment 2). METHOD: In Experiment 1, participants encoded photographic faces of their own ethnicity that were artificially categorized into GOOD or EVIL characters and then completed a source memory task in which they identified faces as old-GOOD, old-EVIL, or new. In Experiment 2, participants viewed a series of words, each followed either by a corresponding image (i.e., SEEN) or by a blank square within which they imagined an image for the word (i.e., IMAGINED). At test, they decided whether the test words were old-SEEN, old-IMAGINED, or new. RESULTS: In general, Canadians outperformed Chinese in memory for categorically processed information, an effect more pronounced for older than for young adults. DISCUSSION: Extensive exercise of culturally preferred categorization strategy differentially benefits Canadians and reduces their age group differences in memory for categorically processed information.

Early clinical predictors of severe acute respiratory syndrome in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association of diagnostic predictors available in the emergency department (ED) with the outcome diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study describes all patients from the Amoy Garden complex who presented to an ED SARS screening clinic during a 2-month outbreak. Clinical and diagnostic predictors were recorded, along with ED diagnoses. Final diagnoses were established independently based on diagnostic tests performed after the ED visit. Associations of key predictors with the final diagnosis of SARS were described. RESULTS: Of 821 patients, 205 had confirmed SARS, 35 undetermined SARS and 581 non-SARS. Multivariable logistic regression showed that the strongest predictors of SARS were abnormal chest x-ray (odds ratio [OR] = 17.4), subjective fever (OR = 9.7), temperature degrees >38 degrees C (OR = 6.4), myalgias (OR = 5.5), chills and rigors (OR = 4.0) and contact exposure (OR = 2.6). In a subset of 176 patients who had a complete blood cell count performed, the strongest predictors were temperature >or=38 degrees C (OR = 15.5), lymphocyte count <1000 (OR = 9.3) and abnormal chest x-ray (OR = 5.7). Diarrhea was a powerful negative predictor (OR = 0.03) of SARS. CONCLUSIONS: Two components of the World Health Organization case definition - fever and contact exposure - are helpful for ED decision-making, but respiratory symptoms do not discriminate well between SARS and non-SARS. Emergency physicians should consider the presence of diarrhea, chest x-ray findings, the absolute lymphocyte count and the platelet count as significant modifiers of disease likelihood. Prospective validation of these findings in other clinical settings is desirable.

Accuracy of clinical diagnosis versus the World Health Organization case definition in the Amoy Garden SARS cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of emergency department (ED) physicians with the World Health Organization (WHO) case definition in a large community-based SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) cohort. METHODS: This was a cohort study of all patients from Hong Kong's Amoy Garden complex who presented to an ED SARS screening clinic during a 2-month outbreak. Clinical findings and WHO case definition criteria were recorded, along with ED diagnoses. Final diagnoses were established independently based on relevant diagnostic tests performed after the ED visit. Emergency physician diagnostic accuracy was compared with that of the WHO SARS case definition. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated using standard formulae. RESULTS: During the study period, 818 patients presented with SARS-like symptoms, including 205 confirmed SARS, 35 undetermined SARS and 578 non-SARS. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 91%, 96% and 94% for ED clinical diagnosis, versus 42%, 86% and 75% for the WHO case definition. Positive likelihood ratios (LR+) were 21.1 for physician judgement and 3.1 for the WHO criteria. Negative likelihood ratios (LR-) were 0.10 for physician judgement and 0.67 for the WHO criteria, indicating that clinician judgement was a much more powerful predictor than the WHO criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Physician clinical judgement was more accurate than the WHO case definition. Reliance on the WHO case definition as a SARS screening tool may lead to an unacceptable rate of misdiagnosis. The SARS case definition must be revised if it is to be used as a screening tool in emergency departments and primary care settings.