Carina I. Hausladen, Manuel Knott, Colin F. Camerer, Pietro Perona
Social perception of faces in a vision-language model



We measure social perception
of human faces
in a vision-language model.


A photo of a
person

A photo of a
person

A photo of a
person
Measuring social perception via
Cosine Similarity


FairFace
Karkkainen et al. (2021)
UTKFace
Zhifei et al. (2017)



FairFace
Karkkainen et al. (2021)
UTKFace
Zhifei et al. (2017)
CausalFace
Liang et al. (2023)



age
CausalFace
CausalFace
female
male
age
CausalFace
female
male
age
Asian
Black
White
Legally protected

Legally protected
Non-protected

smiling

lighting

pose
A photo of a
person

A photo of a
person
Stereotype Content Model
Fiske et al. (2007)
Agency Belief Communion Model
Koch et al. (2016)
Warmth
Competence
unfriendlyfriendlyAgency
Belief
Communion
+
–
C
P
–
+
surgeon
parent
A photo of a
person
friendlyPrompt templates
- A photo of a <attribute> person.
- A <attribute> person.
- This is a <attribute> person.
- Cropped face photo of a <attribute> person.
We deploy an experimental dataset.
1.
We deploy theories of social perception.
2.
We investigate the embedding space directly.
3.
Protected attributes
female
male
age
Asian
Black
White
Non-protected attributes



smiling
lighting
pose
How do
protected and
non-protected
attributes affect social perception?
smiling

Bootstrapping differences
Bootstrapping differences
smiling
—

Bootstrapping differences
smiling
—

—

protected and non-protected attributes
—

Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test, independent samples,
\(p<0.001\)
—

—

ns
—

ns

- Non-protected attributes cause as much variation as protected ones.
- Considering a wide spectrum of protected and non-protected variables is necessary to understand and measure biases comprehensively.
Appendix
Word Embedding Association Test (WEAT)
pooled sd
asian black

photo of a warm person




photo of a warm person



asian black
—
WEAT
Kruskal-Wallis \(\chi^2\) = 1.6,
p-value = 0.4












protected and non-protected attributes
–
+



Bootstrapping Variations
- We randomly choose two distinct values, \(x_1,x_2 \sim X\), for the chosen dimension (e.g., white and black).
- For each pair of values, we select the respective image embeddings, \(i_1(x=x_1), i_2(x=x_2)\) that are equal in all other dimensions (in this example: gender, age, smiling, lighting, and pose).
- We then compute the difference in cosine similarities between each image embedding and a text embedding \(t\), defined as \(\Delta(t, i_1, i_2) = \lvert \cos(i_1, t) - \cos(i_2, t) \rvert\).
- This process is repeated 1,000 times, generating a bootstrap distribution of \( \Delta \) values.
- This distribution describes the impact of the specific dimension on the cosine similarity of image embeddings and text embedding.


Heatmap of Pearson correlation coefficients of positive and negative valence dimensions of the ABC model.

Smiling
a photo of a person

a photo of a person
