A 2 (task: choose for female versus choose for male) ? 2 (participants’ gender: males versus females) ? 2 (object colour: black versus white) mixed-model ANOVA showed an interaction between task and object colour, F_{(1,thirty six)} = , p . Planned comparisons showed that, when instructed to choose for the male character, participants made more fixations on the black objects (M = 4.92, s.e. = 0.29) than the white objects (M = 4.24, s.e. = 0.32), t₃₆ = 5.05, p . Again, female participants made more fixations on white objects overall (M = 4.34, s.e. = 0.32) than on the black objects (M = 3.91, s.e. = 0.29), t₃₆ = 3.15, p = 0.003, d_z = 0.70. Male participants did the opposite, namely, made more fixations on the black (M = 4.02, s.e. = 0.29) than the white objects (M = 3.82, s.e. = 0.32). However, this difference did not reach statistical significance, t₃₆ = 1.47, p = 0.149, d_z = 0.33. There were other theoretically uninteresting results, which we do not report here.

8. Talk

The three tests demonstrate that you to definitely element powering the latest categorization regarding female and you will boys ‘s the aspect away from illumination. Widely, lady have a lighter skin the color weighed against males [5–8]. Just like the Try out step 1 suggests, participants is faster in the classifying girls names in light since the female names than just when in black. The reverse development retains to have men labels. Male names inside the black colored is actually processed smaller than men names in the white. What is more, while the Try out 2 suggests, when exhibited easily with an uncertain stimulus that’s a white blob, then it is more likely one users will categorize it a female name even when the they understand was good blob in the light.