他種族效應(other-race effect)是人們辨認及記憶他種族臉孔的能力，比辨認或記憶本種族臉孔更差的現象。他種族效應相關研究的結果已經很穩定，且被學界認為是一個跨種族的現象；但關於多種族混血兒臉孔的研究卻仍然很稀少。先前研究中發現，四到九歲非本質性思想(non-essentialist thinking)的白人兒童傾向將混合臉孔當作白人（本種族）臉孔來登錄，而具本質性思想(essentialist thinking)的白人兒童則傾向將混合臉孔當作黑人（他種族）來登錄。為提供跨文化與第三方種族的證據，本研究中測試了81名三到六歲的台灣兒童以及30名成人，對白人/亞洲人以及白人/黑人混血臉孔的種族分類傾向。全部兒童參與者都完成了三個作業：種族分類作業(race categorization task)、蠟筆塗色作業(crayon task)、以及種族恆性的判定作業(racial constancy task)；而由於絕大部分成人參與者都具有本質性思想，因此只進行了種族分類作業。實驗結果中發現，在81名兒童參與者當中有57名為非本質性思想組，24名為本質性思想組，兩組參與者的年齡有統計上的顯著差異(t(81) = 4.41，p < .001)。白人/亞洲人混血臉孔分類作業的結果中，非本質性思想組的兒童參與者(N = 57)傾向將白人與亞洲人混血臉孔分類為亞洲人（本種族）臉孔(p = .049)，而本質性思想組的兒童參與者(N = 24)與成人參與者(N = 30)都傾向將白人與者亞洲人混血臉孔分類為白人（他種族）臉孔(兒童參與者 p = .045；成人參與者 p = .037)，該結果與先前測試白人兒童的研究結果一致。白人/黑人混血臉孔的分類作業中，本質性與非本質性思想組的兒童以及成人參與者都表現出一致的分類傾向，即將黑人與白人混血臉孔分類為白人（非本質性思想組 p = .003；本質性思想組 p = .003；成人參與者 p = .046），此結果與先前研究相比是一個新的發現。總結來說，本研究成功地使用混血兒臉孔對先前白人兒童的種族分類研究提供了以台灣兒童為參與者的跨文化證據，也為第三種族對兩個他種族混血臉孔的分類提供了新的看法。 Other-race effect (ORE) refers to the observation that people are better at recognizing or memorizing own-race faces than other-race faces. Although the ORE has been reliably demonstrated across ethnicity, biracial faces are rarely explored. In a recent study utilizing Black, White, and biracial ambiguous faces, 4- to 9-year-old White children with non-essentialist thinking could better memorize ambiguous faces than those who employed essentialist thinking. The present study aimed to explore the effect of essentialist thinking on race categorization in Taiwanese children and adults. Eighty-one 3- to 6- year-old children and thirty adults (mean age= 38 years) performed categorization of biracial-face photos taken from biracial individuals. Two mixed-race conditions were included, Asian (own-race)/White (other-race) biracial faces and Black/White (both other-race) biracial faces. In each mixed-race condition, the child participants performed three tasks: the on-line Categorization Task for 12 racially ambiguous faces, the Crayon Task (to color the skin tone of 4 biracial faces), and the Constancy Task (to determine whether the child employed essentialist thinking or not). The adults performed the on-line Categorization Task only. We found that among the eighty-one children, about one-third of them employed essentialist thinking on race. For the Asian/White condition, adults and the children with essentialist thinking (N=24) tended to categorize the ambiguous faces as White (other race) (p< .001 in adults, p=.045 in children), whereas the children with non-essentialist thinking (N=57) categorized the ambiguous faces to Asian (p=.049). This observation is consistent with the previous study with Caucasian children living in the U.S. For the Black/White condition, adults and children with essentialist thinking and non-essentialist thinking tended to categorize the Black/White ambiguous faces as White, which is a novel finding. In sum, the present study provided cross-cultural evidence exploring the effect of essentialist thinking on children’s categorization of racially ambiguous faces.
