Region | Trust |
---|---|
Africa | 5.31 |
Asia | 5.17 |
Australia & New Zealand | 5.01 |
Central America & Mexico | 5.47 |
Eastern Europe | 4.84 |
Middle East | 4.89 |
Scandinavia | 5.17 |
South America | 5.12 |
UK | 5.20 |
USA & Canada | 5.20 |
Western Europe | 5.24 |
Report 4
Data Sources
The rating data are from the Psychological Science Accelerator project: To Which World Regions Does the Valence-Dominance Model of Social Perception Apply? (Jones et al. 2021).
The face stimuli are from Ma, Correll, and Wittenbrink (2015). While the original image set refers to “target self-identified race (A = asian; B = black; L = latinx; W = white)”, we will rename this variable to “ethnicity” and refer to it as such throughout the report.
The 120 faces were rated on a 1-9 scale for 13 different characteristics: “aggressive”, “attractive”, “caring”, “confident”, “dominant”, “emostable”, “intelligent”, “mean”, “responsible”, “sociable”, “trustworthy”, “unhappy”, and “weird”. Data are presented for average ratings in each of 11 world regions.
Trustworthiness
Table 1 shows mean trustworthiness ratings by world region, while Table 2 breaks this down by face gender.
Region | Male Mean | Male SD | Female Mean | Female SD |
---|---|---|---|---|
Africa | 5.10 | 0.54 | 5.53 | 0.53 |
Asia | 5.06 | 0.48 | 5.27 | 0.42 |
Australia & New Zealand | 4.77 | 0.49 | 5.26 | 0.51 |
Central America & Mexico | 5.34 | 0.54 | 5.59 | 0.57 |
Eastern Europe | 4.61 | 0.55 | 5.07 | 0.68 |
Middle East | 4.81 | 0.57 | 4.96 | 0.60 |
Scandinavia | 4.99 | 0.63 | 5.35 | 0.60 |
South America | 4.90 | 0.48 | 5.33 | 0.44 |
UK | 4.90 | 0.67 | 5.50 | 0.73 |
USA & Canada | 5.01 | 0.54 | 5.38 | 0.49 |
Western Europe | 5.04 | 0.59 | 5.44 | 0.57 |
Factors
Factor analysis revealed two factors, labelled “valence” and “dominance”. The four characteristics that correlated best with valence were trustworthy, emotionally stable, responsible, and sociable. The four characteristics that correlated best with dominance were dominant, aggressive, mean, and confident.
Figure 1 shows the distribution of mean ratings for the valence- and dominance-related characteristics in the four European regions.
Original Insight
Include the same plot (Figure 2) from assessment 3, fixing any problems with that were identified in the feedback.
Simulation and Analysis
I simulated a new dataset for the United Kingdom from the descriptive values in Table 2, creating a new dataset of average trustworthiness ratings for a simulated sample of 60 new male faces and 60 new female faces.
I then used a two-tailed t-test with a critical alpha of 0.05 to test for a gender difference in trustworthiness ratings in this new simulated dataset.
In UK, there was a significant gender difference in trustworthiness ratings (t(117.61) = -3.03, p= 0.003, 95% CI = [-0.63, -0.13]).
Iteration and Power
region | mean_Male | sd_Male | mean_Female | sd_Female | power |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Africa | 5.10 | 0.54 | 5.53 | 0.53 | 0.88 |
Asia | 5.06 | 0.48 | 5.27 | 0.42 | 0.36 |
Australia & New Zealand | 4.77 | 0.49 | 5.26 | 0.51 | 0.99 |
Central America & Mexico | 5.34 | 0.54 | 5.59 | 0.57 | 0.42 |
Eastern Europe | 4.61 | 0.55 | 5.07 | 0.68 | 0.91 |
Middle East | 4.81 | 0.57 | 4.96 | 0.60 | 0.06 |
Scandinavia | 4.99 | 0.63 | 5.35 | 0.60 | 0.66 |
South America | 4.90 | 0.48 | 5.33 | 0.44 | 1.00 |
UK | 4.90 | 0.67 | 5.50 | 0.73 | 0.96 |
USA & Canada | 5.01 | 0.54 | 5.38 | 0.49 | 0.84 |
Western Europe | 5.04 | 0.59 | 5.44 | 0.57 | 0.84 |
Reflections
Reproducibility
Thing I did
How it improves reproducibility…
Thing I did
How it improves reproducibility…
Thing I did
How it improves reproducibility…
Thing I did
How it improves reproducibility…
Thing I did
How it improves reproducibility…
Sources of Learning
Please explain the sources of learning you used in this assessment, including the book, help sessions, peers, online sources, and generative AI. (up to 300 words)