Singles and Faces: High Recognition for Female Faces in Single Males, while males in a relationshiop didn't do better

Singles and Faces: High Recognition for Female Faces in Single Males. Mohamad El Haj, Ahmed A. Moustafa4, and Jean-Louis Nandrino. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2019 • volume 15(4) • 301-307. DOI • 10.5709/acp-0277-x

Abstract: A substantial body of research has assessed the effect of gender on face recognition; however, little is known about the effect of relationship status on face recognition. In this study, we assessed for the first time how relationship status impacts face recognition by asking 62 male and female participants to decide whether they had previously encountered faces of males and females. Participants were also asked to fill a socio-demographic variables questionnaire which included, among other information, question about their relationship status (i.e., single vs. in a relationship). A significant effect of relationship status on face recognition was observed only in males; namely, single males demonstrated higher face recognition than males in relationships, whereas similar face recognition was observed in single and in-relationship females. More specifically, single males demonstrated higher recognition for female than for male faces, whereas no differences were observed in single females, males in relationships, or in females in relationship. Single males seem to be motivated by mating opportunity and, thus, unlike single females or males and females in relationships, devote high attentional resources to processing faces of the opposite gender.


DISCUSSION

This study investigated the effect of gender and relationship status on
face recognition. Our analyses showed higher face recognition in female
than in male participants, regardless of their relationship status.
A significant effect of relationship status on face recognition was observed
only in males; specifically, single males demonstrated a higher
face recognition than males in relationships, whereas similar face
recognition was observed in single females and females in relationships.
More specifically, single males demonstrated higher recognition
for female than for male faces, whereas no differences were observed
in single females and both females and males in relationships. In addition,
higher episodic memory was observed in female than in male
participants, whereas no significant effect of relationship status was
observed on episodic memory. Together, relative to males in relationships,
single males demonstrated higher face recognition, especially
for female faces, but similar episodic memory, whereas females demonstrated
similar face recognition and episodic memory regardless of
their relationship status.

Our findings replicate prior studies with regard to (a) higher general
face recognition and episodic memory in female participants and
(b) the own-gender bias in female participants, that is, the fact that
these participants demonstrated higher recognition for female than for
male faces. The finding of a higher general face recognition in these
participants mirrors studies demonstrating that females outperform
males in tasks involving face recognition, independent of face age
and ethnicity (Herlitz & Lovén, 2013; Herlitz et al., 2013; McBain et
al., 2009; Rehnman & Herlitz, 2006, 2007). This finding also mirrors
research demonstrating that females are better at recognizing and interpreting
emotional facial expressions (McClure, 2000) as that infant
girls spend more time looking at faces than boys (Connellan et al.,
2000). The advantage females have in face processing has been attributed
to a general greater interest in and knowledge of social aspects of
the world (Kaplan, 1978; Kimura, 1999; Rehnman & Herlitz, 2007).
As for the high verbal episodic memory in our female participants,
studies suggest females tend to outperform males when the memory
material is verbal (Astur, Ortiz, & Sutherland, 1998; Lewin, Wolgers,
& Herlitz, 2001; Ruff, Light, & Quayhagen, 1989; Ullman et al., 2008).
This advantage is illustrated by a study in which females and males
were tested on a series of tasks involving the recall and recognition
of verbal material and abstract pictorial stimuli (Herlitz & Yonker,
2002). Herlitz and Yonker (2002) found that females outperformed
males on memory of verbal materials. The superiority of females in
verbal processing has been also observed for autobiographical memory
(Grysman, 2017; Grysman et al., 2016; Nahari & Pazuelo, 2015). Since
our episodic memory task implied processing verbal information, it is
not surprising that female participants in our study have outperformed
male participants. With regard to the own-gender bias in female
participants, research suggests that females perform at a higher level
on female than male faces (Cross et al., 1971; Lewin & Herlitz, 2002;
Wright & Sladden, 2003). In contrast, males do not appear to show
a corresponding own-gender bias for male faces. Several studies have
found that males perform at a similar level for both male and female
faces (Cross et al., 1971; Ino, Nakai, Azuma, Kimura, & Fukuyama,
2010; Lewin & Herlitz, 2002; Loven et al., 2011; Megreya et al., 2011;
Wright & Sladden, 2003), mirroring the performance of male participants
in our study. The own-gender bias, as observed in females, has
been interpreted as reflecting the fact that females’ greater social interest
is specifically directed towards other females (Loven et al., 2011).
According to another social account, females may be more interested
in female than in male faces due to the high value placed by society
on female attractiveness (Cross et al., 1971; Ellis, Shepherd, & Bruce,
1973). Taken together, our findings replicate previous studies with
regard to the higher general face recognition and episodic memory in
female participants, as well as with regard to their own-gender bias.
Compared to other investigations of face recognition, the originality
of our study lies in the assessment of relationship status. Our
findings demonstrate higher face recognition in single females than in
single males, as well as in females in relationships than males in relationships.
Accordingly, regardless of their relationship status, females
seem to outperform males on face recognition. The main finding of
our paper was the high face recognition in single male participants,
especially for female faces. Female participants, on the other hand,
demonstrated similar face recognition regardless of their relationship
status or the gender of faces. In our view, single males are specifically
motivated by mating opportunity, and thus, tend to pay more attention
to features of the opposite gender than single females do. On the
other hand, individuals in relationships may benefit from affective and
emotional comfort and stability, decreasing their motivation to process
physical features of the opposite gender, which may explain why similar
face recognition was observed in our female and male participants
in relationships.

This suggestion is supported by studies demonstrating that while
single individuals increase implicit attention to physically attractive
opposite gender targets, individuals in relationships are inattentive to
such stimuli (Maner et al., 2009; Maner et al., 2008). Our assumption
is additionally supported by the individuation motivation account
(Hugenberg, Wilson, See, & Young, 2013), which states that individuals
essentially process faces considered worthy of their attention. More
specifically, enhanced motivation triggers selective attention (and
deeper processing), which can facilitate face encoding. This model is
supported by research demonstrating bias toward low processing of female
faces when males consider a short-term mating strategy (Confer
et al., 2010; Lu & Chang, 2012; Wagstaff et al., 2015). Even though the
individuation motivation account does not take into account the effect
of relationship status, it does, however, provide support to the assumption
that single males are motivated by mating opportunity, resulting in
high memory for females faces.

The effect of motivation on face processing in single males can also
be interpreted from an evolutionary perspective. According to one
evolutionary account, humans possess fundamental social motives
shaped by natural selection to produce behaviors that increase reproductive
fitness (Kenrick, Neuberg, Griskevicius, Becker, & Schaller,
2010). Interestingly, mate-related motives have been considered as one
of fundamental social motives that exert important effects on social
behaviors (Griskevicius, Cialdini, & Kenrick, 2006; Karremans et al.,
2011; Lydon et al., 1999; Maner et al., 2007; Maner et al., 2012; Ritter
et al., 2010). Further, attention is the first step in information processing
and in memory, and its evolutionary function is mainly related to
information relevant to survival and reproductive goals (Dunbar &
Barrett, 2007), siven the limited attentional capacity and the diverse
and complex social information that surrounds us. Hence, this attentional
selectivity may result in high processing of female faces in
single males. Single females, on the other hand, do not seem to demonstrate
such an attentional bias, probably due to their enhanced overall
memory for faces. That is, they process faces faster and more efficiently
than males (Bowles et al., 2009; Godard & Fiori, 2010, 2012; Megreya
et al., 2011; Sommer et al., 2013), or they simply do not seek mating
opportunities as much as males do.

One limitation of our study is the small sample size, which increases
the risk of Type II statistical errors. Another is that we did not consider
the duration of the relationship status of our participants. Future studies
should take into account the duration of relationship as individuals
in recently established relationships or those in open relationships
may have high mating motivation, and thus, may demonstrate high
face recognition. Another suggestion for future research is to explore
face recognition according to sexual orientation, as single homosexual
individuals may demonstrate higher face recognition for the same
rather than for the opposite gender. Finally, it would be of interest to
take response time into account, as this variable may provide better
insight into participants’ performance. This issue is important because
accuracy measures may not reflect attentional processes by themselves.
By addressing these limitations, future research may provide a comprehensive
picture of the effect of relationship status on face recognition.
Regardless of its potential limitations, this study shows, for the first
time, that relationship status does impact face recognition and not
episodic memory in general.