ORIGINAL ARTICLE Now Everyone Looks the Same: Alcohol Intoxication Reduces the Own-Race Bias in Face Recognition Kirin F. Hilliar • Richard I. Kemp • Thomas F. Denson Published online: 4 February 2010 Ó American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2009 Abstract Several factors influence the reliability of eye- witness identification evidence. Typically, recognition for same-race faces is better than for different-race faces (the own-race bias), and alcohol intoxication decreases overall face recognition accuracy. This research investigated how alcohol intoxication influences the own-race bias. Asian and European participants completed tests of recognition memory for Asian and European faces when either mildly intoxicated (mean breath alcohol concentration of .05) or when sober. Compared to their sober counterparts, intoxi- cated participants showed a reduced own-race bias. Specifically, alcohol intoxication had a larger negative effect on the recognition of same-race faces compared to different-race faces. The legal and theoretical implications of these results are discussed. Keywords Own-race bias Á Alcohol intoxication Á Face recognition Á Eyewitness identification The own-race bias (also known as the cross-race effect) refers to the general tendency for people to show better recognition memory for faces from their own racial group (same-race faces) compared to faces from a different racial group (different-race faces; Meissner & Brigham, 2001). The own-race bias is a very robust effect, found across a variety of racial groups (Chance & Goldstein, 1996; Mei- ssner & Brigham, 2001; Ng & Lindsay, 1994), age groups (e.g., Corenblum & Meissner, 2006; Pezdek, Blandon- Gitlin, & Moore, 2003), and recognition tasks (e.g., Lind- say, Jack, & Christian, 1991; Meissner & Brigham, 2001; Smith, Stinson, & Prosser, 2004; Walker & Tanaka, 2003). The own-race bias is often an issue that is raised when considering the reliability of different-race eyewitness identification evidence presented in criminal prosecutions (see Wells & Olson, 2001). A survey of psychologists specializing in eyewitness evidence found that 90% believed the own-race bias was reliable enough to warrant being the subject of expert testimony in the courtroom (Kassin, Tubb, Hosch, & Memon, 2001). In the United States, a number of courts have allowed experts to describe research on the own-race bias (e.g., United States v. Nor- wood, 1996; United States v. Smith, 1984; United States v. Stevens, 1984; but not in United States v. Hudson, 1989; United States v. Watson, 1978; see also Brigham, Wass- erman, & Meissner, 1999; Leippe, 1995), and some courts allow a general warning about the lower accuracy of dif- ferent-race identifications to be given (e.g., the New Jersey Supreme Court in State v. Cromedy, 1999, cited in Mei- ssner & Brigham, 2001). Thus, the own-race bias is a widely recognized phenomenon within the legal system. One area that has not been explored, however, is how the own-race bias might be influenced by other factors known to affect eyewitness identification accuracy, such as alcohol intoxication. Broadly speaking, alcohol intoxica- tion has been shown to have a negative effect on people’s memory for information they are exposed to when intoxi- cated (see Mintzer, 2007; Read, Yuille, & Tollestrup, 1992; Steele & Josephs, 1990). This is believed to be because intoxication limits encoding to only the most salient cues in K. F. Hilliar (&) Á R. I. Kemp Á T. F. Denson School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia e-mail: khilliar@psy.unsw.edu.au R. I. Kemp e-mail: Richard.kemp@unsw.edu.au T. F. Denson e-mail: t.denson@unsw.edu.au 123 Law Hum Behav (2010) 34:367–378 DOI 10.1007/s10979-009-9204-x