Cross-Race Effect

Also known as: Own-Race Bias, Other-Race Effect

The cross-race effect, also known as the own-race bias, is a perceptual and memory bias in which individuals are better at recognizing, differentiating, and remembering faces of their own racial or ethnic group than those of other groups. This can contribute to misidentification, especially in eyewitness contexts.

Social Biases

/ Face perception and memory

10 min read

experimental Evidence


Cross-Race Effect: Difficulty Recognizing Faces from Other Groups

Most people are better at telling apart and remembering faces of people from their own racial or ethnic group than faces from other groups. This is called the cross-race effect or own-race bias.

The cross-race effect is not simply about prejudice; it is also influenced by perceptual experience and attention. However, its consequences can be serious, particularly for eyewitness identification and social interactions.

Core Idea

The cross-race effect involves:

  • Higher accuracy and confidence in recognizing own-group faces.
  • Lower accuracy and greater confusion when recognizing or recalling outgroup faces.
  • A tendency to see outgroup faces as more similar to each other than they actually are.

Why It Happens

  • Perceptual Expertise: Greater exposure to own-group faces helps people learn subtle distinguishing features.
  • Categorical Processing: Outgroup faces may be processed more at the group level ("they") than at the individual level (specific features).
  • Attention and Motivation: People may pay more individuating attention to ingroup members.

Examples

  • Eyewitness Identification: Witnesses are more likely to misidentify suspects of a different race.
  • Everyday Interactions: Difficulty recognizing acquaintances from other racial groups, leading to awkward social errors.

Consequences

  • Legal and Justice Risks: Cross-race misidentification has contributed to wrongful convictions.
  • Interpersonal Strain: Repeated failures to recognize outgroup individuals can be perceived as disrespectful or prejudiced.

Mitigation Strategies

  1. Increase Diverse Contact and Individuation
    Meaningful interactions with people from other groups can improve recognition accuracy.

  2. Improve Lineup and ID Procedures
    Legal systems can use double-blind lineups, better instructions, and safeguards to reduce misidentification risk.

  3. Awareness and Training
    Educating professionals (e.g., law enforcement) about the cross-race effect helps contextualize eyewitness evidence.

Relationship to Other Biases

  • Outgroup Homogeneity Bias: Seeing outgroup members as more alike.
  • Stereotyping: Group-based expectations can interact with perceptual biases.
  • Ultimate Attribution Error: Biased explanations for outgroup behavior.

Conclusion

The cross-race effect shows how our perceptual and memory systems are tuned by experience, often making us more accurate with familiar groups. Recognizing this bias is essential for fair legal processes and for more sensitive, individualized interactions across group lines.

Common Triggers

Limited exposure to other-race faces

Typical Contexts

Legal identification procedures

Everyday social recognition

Security and access control

Mitigation Strategies

Diverse social contact and training: Increase experience with and attention to individuating features of other-race faces.

Effectiveness: medium

Difficulty: moderate

Potential Decision Harms

Higher risk of wrongful identification and unfair treatment of outgroup individuals.

major Severity


Related Biases

Explore these related cognitive biases to deepen your understanding

Risky Shift

9 min read

Risky shift is the tendency for groups to make riskier decisions than individuals would make alone, especially when responsibility is diffused across members.

Social Biases / Group decision-making

/ Group Risk-Taking

Abilene Paradox

9 min read

The Abilene paradox is a group decision-making failure where people agree to a course of action that almost no one individually wants, because each assumes others are in favor.

Social Biases / Group decision-making

/ False consensus decision

Zero-Sum Bias

2 min read

Zero-sum bias is a cognitive bias towards thinking that a situation is a zero-sum game, where one person's gain would be another's loss.

Social Biases

/ Fixed pie bias

Correspondence Bias

9 min read

Correspondence bias is the tendency to infer stable personality traits from others' behavior while underestimating situational influences.

Social Biases / Attribution and impression formation

/ Fundamental Attribution Error

Trait Ascription Bias

8 min read

Trait ascription bias is the tendency to see others' behavior as reflecting fixed traits, while viewing our own behavior as more flexible and influenced by circumstances.

Social Biases / Self–other perception

/ Self–Other Asymmetry

Hostile Attribution Bias

9 min read

Hostile attribution bias is the tendency to interpret ambiguous actions of others as intentionally hostile or threatening.

Social Biases / Attribution and aggression

/ Hostile Attribution of Intent