Identifying gender when gender cues are eliminated

Identifying Gender When Gender Cues Are Eliminated
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date

Campbell, R., Benson, P. J., Wallace, S. B., Doesbergh, S., & Coleman, M. (1999). More about brows: How poses that change brow position affects perceptions of gender. Perception, 28(4), 489-504.
This article discusses how the perception of gender can be greatly affected by poses and the position of the eyebrows. The authors of this source carried out different experiments that involved both identifying genders of various unfamiliar people from pictures that were taken in various poses of the head and the brows. From the data of the experiments, Campbell and her colleagues argue and conclude that features like head position and the distance of the eyebrows influence the perception of classifying gender.
The source is useful since the arguments about the perception of gender classification is based on facts and statistics from various experiments that the authors of this article carried out. In their experiments, the authors had masked the gender cues such as hairstyle and clothes to conceal the gender of the persons in the images used. This shows that the source is focused on other features that influence the gender categorization other than the gender cues. Thus, the article is relevant and useful.
Carey, S., & Diamond, R. (1977). From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. Science, 195(4275), 312-314.
The article presents ways in which people of different ages represent images in their brains depending on the development of their right cerebral hemispheres.

The source also presents how simple distortions of images can affect their recognition especially those faces that are not familiar. The authors argue that younger children are cannot permanently configure unfamiliar faces from single photos but instead focus on features like facial expressions and use these features to match the faces.
The source is relevant and useful since discuses about factors that affect the people’s perception when categorizing people. Furthermore, the authors of the article support their hypothesis using data from different experiments that were carried out.
Hancock, P. J., Bruce, V., & Burton, A. M. (2000). Recognition of unfamiliar faces. Trends in cognitive sciences, 4(9), 330-337.
This article discusses the different factors that affect the people’s abilities to match unfamiliar faces. The authors of this source argue that even minor differences in the quality or viewpoints can affect our abilities to match faces that we are not familiar with. Carey and Diamond turn to computer face recognition systems to help understand the problems of face identification; both in theory and practical.
The source is useful since discusses the factors that can influence how people identify the one’s gender. Discussing of the perceptual and cognitive aspects in recognition of unfamiliar faces make the source relevant to be used. Furthermore, by considering the computer face recognition system helps to understand how other features other than the gender cues can be used to identify and categorize an individual in an image. Hence, this source is relevant.
Zárate, M. A., Stoever, C. J., MacLin, M. K., & Arms-Chavez, C. J. (2008). Neurocognitive underpinnings of face perception: Further evidence of distinct person and group perception processes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 94(1), 108.
This article presents evidence of individual and group perception processes. It discusses face recognition and social categorization. The authors present their arguments using a social perception using a cognitive neuroscience model and they propose that the left and the right cerebral hemispheres process single and combined features respectively producing group and person-based representations.
The source is relevant since the Zárate and colleagues agree that people are categorized in various ways and interaction with others can influence one’s perception. Therefore, it is appropriate to the topic since it discusses other ways in of categorizing gender other the use of gender cues. The source further states that persons focus more on the individuating characteristics of the targets are of the same gender as the observer. This article is also useful since the authors support their hypothesis using data from an experiment that they did. This makes the article a reliable source.

References
Campbell, R., Benson, P. J., Wallace, S. B., Doesbergh, S., & Coleman, M. (1999). More about brows: How poses that change brow position affects perceptions of gender. Perception, 28(4), 489-504.
Carey, S., & Diamond, R. (1977). From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. Science, 195(4275), 312-314.
Hancock, P. J., Bruce, V., & Burton, A. M. (2000). Recognition of unfamiliar faces. Trends in cognitive sciences, 4(9), 330-337.
Zárate, M. A., Stoever, C. J., MacLin, M. K., & Arms-Chavez, C. J. (2008). Neurocognitive underpinnings of face perception: Further evidence of distinct person and group perception processes. Journal of personality and social psychology, 94(1), 108.