Defend or refute the idea that persons of different races "all look alike."

What will be an ideal response?

Legal scholars have expressed a concern over an own-race recognition bias in eyewitness identification for some time. In fact, Feingold argued nearly 90 years ago that it is well known that, other things being equal, individuals of a given race are distinguishable from one another in proportion to our familiarity and our contact with the race as a whole. Thus, to the uninitiated American, all Asians look alike, whereas to Asians, all White people look alike. Experts in the field of eyewitness memory and about half of potential jurors endorse the belief that cross-racial identifications are less reliable than same-race identifications. This presumption is based on the belief in the existence of an own-race bias—that is, that people recognize people of their own race better than they do people of another race. Some evidence shows that persons who have close friends of the other race show less of an own-race recognition bias. Children living in mixed-race environments show less of an own-race recognition bias than do children living in a segregated environment. Conversely, other research indicates that the own-race recognition bias is not reduced by frequent contact with the other race and that prejudiced persons are no more likely to exhibit an own-race recognition bias than are nonprejudiced person. There is some evidence indicating that persons who view other-race faces tend to focus on the constituent (individual) features of the face, whereas observers of same-race faces focus on configural features of the face.