Can race be erased? Coalitional

computation and social categorizationRobert Kurzban, John Tooby, and Leda Cosmides

Presentation by: Anne-Lise Nilsen and Adam Szymankiewicz

Intro

Background:● Intergroup conflict depends on categorizing the

world into US vs. THEM→ Predisposes humans to discriminate in favor

of ingroup and against outgroup● Because of this it is thought that when you meet

someone new it activates 3 “primitive” or “primary dimensions”o Race, Sex and Age

Intro

Evolutionary Psychology perspective:● According to the EEA…

o This is not true regarding race… hunter and gatherers would never meet other “races” therefore could not have evolved the cognitive mechanisms that would automate this info.

Intro

Hypothesis: The (apparently) automatic and mandatory encoding of race is instead a byproduct of adaptations that evolved for an alternative function that was a regular part of the lives of our foraging ancestors: detecting coalitions and alliances.

IntroCoalitions and Alliances● Evolutionarily: Within the bands of

hunter and gatherers, there were coalitions and alliances. This is also found within other non-human primates.o Neuro-cognitive mechanisms which tracked

shifting alliances would have been beneficial to successfully negotiate their social world, therefore could be selected for.

IntroNeurocognitive mechanism should be sensitive to:● patterns of coordinated action, cooperation and

competition● cues that predict- either purposefully or

incidentally- each individuals political allegiances*“Because this circuitry detects correspondence between allegiances and appearance, stable dimensions of shared appearance- which may be otherwise, meaningless- emerge in the cognitive system as markers of social categories.”

Intro● Any readily observable feature-

however arbitrary- can acquire social significance and cognitive efficacy when it valididates cues patterns of alliance. o example: dress, dialect, manner, gait, family

resemblance, ethnic & coalitional badges● But what about sex, which

ancestorially is fixed?

Predictions1. Race will not be encoded across all social contexts when manipulated coalitional variables.

2. Shared visual appearance is not necessary for coalition encoding. But it can reinforce and stabilize a coalitional categorization.

3. Arbitrary cues other than race can be endowed with the same properties that race has previously exhibited by linking to coalitional membership.

4. Race encoding will be diminished when:*Race is no longer a valid cue

*Alternative cues are present that do reliably predict5. Sex will be encoded stronger than race even when irrelevant6. Encoding of sex will not diminish coalition encoding

MethodsSubjects- Undergraduates at the University of California, Santa Barbara- Men to Women: ~50:50- primarily Euro-American and Asian American E1: 55 participantsE2: 52 participantsE3: 55 participantsE4: 57 participantsE5: 51 participantsE6: 52 participants

MethodsMemory confusion protocol1) subjects are asked to form impressions of individuals whom they

will see engaged in a conversation2) See a sequence of sentences paired with a photo of individual

who said it24 sentences, 8.5 sec eachEach sentence paired with a photo of one man

3) Surprise recall task - sentences in random order, attributing them to the individual that said it

Misattributions reveal encoding - subjects more readily confuse individuals whom they have categorized as members of the same category than those whom they have categorized as members of different categories.

MethodsRival coalitions constructed such that race was uncorrelated with coalition membership:- the rival four-person coalitions were each composed of two European-American and two African-American men

Methods

This design allowed to:E1: replicate the basic phenomenon of racial encodingE2: see whether the tendency to encode race could in fact be

reduced by an introduction of a visually accessible cue to a non-racial coalition division

E3:replicate the basic phenomenon of encoding via sex E4: see whether the tendency to encode sex could be reduced by

an introduction of a visual cue E5&6: Replicate the E1 and E2 studies for validity

MethodsIf the human brains contains neurocomputational machinery for

tracking coalitional alliances , then constructing a new social environment in which coalition is uncorrelated with race should weaken the preexisting weight given to race as a cue to a coalition within that context.

If though the prior claims are correct - if race is a prior dimension of person representation, then encoding this new social environment should make no difference.

Methods

Experiment 1- no visual cues to coalition membership- all male, same shirts, mixed races- coalition allegiance inferred only from content and sequence of their utterances

Methods

Experiment 2 - same as E1 only difference: shared appearance to the coalition through verbal allegiance cues (same color of shirts of members of the same coalition)

- if prediction 3 is true: coalition will be spontaneously encoded in exp 2 just as strongly - or more so - than race is.

MethodsExperiment 3:● Run in an identical manner as

experiment 1 except sex was used instead of raceo No visual cues of coalition alliance

Methods

Experiment 4:● Run in an identical manner as

experiment 2 except sex was used instead of raceo Coalition members wore the same color shirt

Methods

Experiments 5 & 6● exact replicates of experiment 1 and 2

except for different individuals in the pictures.

Results

Experiment 1● Subjects encoded a new dimension: coalition

membership● More within than between coalition errors

● Effect of Race twice as large as the effect of coalitiono Effect size of coalition = 0.31o Effect size of race = 0.67

Results

Experiment 2● Effect of Coalition marked by cues of shared

appearanceso Effect size of coalition = 0.79 (o Effect size of race = 0.49

● Shows that a new and arbitrary coalition can be encoded just as strongly as race is

Results

Experiment 2● Two questions:

o when does race ceased to be a predictor of coalitional allegiance within a given social context?

o Does coalition acquire the robust properties race had & does race lose the strength it once had in a situation when a coalition membership is marked by cues of shared appearances?

ResultsExperiments 3 & 4

● When cues to coalition had to be inferred:○ effect size for coalition= 0.35 (p=0.0045)

*comparable to experiment 1● When cues were amplified:

o effect size for coalition= 0.81 (p= 9.6 x 10^-15)

*comparable to experiment 2

Results: Experiments 3 & 4● But… the extent at which subject categorized

targets, sex was very high in experiment 3 and 4

*Experiment 3: effect size= 0.91 (p=3.2x10^-22)

*Experiment 4: effect size= 0.84 (p=1.1x10^-19)

● Sex was always encoded more strongly than coalition

● Effect sizes for sex were significantly larger than race in analogous conditions o sex (ex. 3): 0.91 vs race (ex. 1): 0.67 (p=

0.00013)o sex (ex. 4): 0.84 vs race (ex. 2): 0.49

(p= .00021)o t tests give complementary results

Results: Experiment 3 & 4

Main take away: Categorizing based on sex

stays high even when coalitional cues are

amplified, but race effects disappear.

Results: Experiment 5 & 6

● Replicated results of experiment 1 and 2 when cues to coalitional alliance were verbal only. (significant race effect)

● But when cues to coalitional alliance were augmented visually, the size of the race effect dropped substantially from 0.57 to 0.15 (p=0.0073)

● “In this condition it would appear that the extent to which subject encoded targets by their race was not merely diminished, it was erased.”

Figure 1

Figure 2.

Conclusions and Discussion

- Ethnicity (Race) is an ecologically valid prediction of people’s social alliances

- Racial encoding sensitive to coalition manipulation

- < 4 min exposure to an environmental coalition (shirt color) decreased the effect of race

Limitations

- Diversity of participants didn’t match the

diversity within the picture

Questions

- What does our elephant say about that?

-Where would mixed race

individuals fall undercategorizations?