The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The effect of image pixelation on unfamiliar-face matching
Abstract
Summary: Low‐resolution, pixelated images from closed‐circuit television (CCTV) can be used to compare the perpetrators of crime with high‐resolution photographs of potential suspects. The current study investigated the accuracy of person identification under these conditions, by comparing high‐resolution and pixelated photographs of unfamiliar faces in a series of matching tasks. Performance decreased gradually with different levels of pixelation and was close to chance with a horizontal image resolution of only 8 pixels per face (Experiment 1). Matching accuracy could be improved by reducing the size of pixelated faces (Experiment 2) or by varying the size of the to‐be‐compared‐with high‐resolution face image (Experiment 3). In addition, pixelation produced effects that appear to be separable from other factors that might affect matching performance, such as changes in face view (Experiment 4). These findings reaffirm that criminal identifications from CCTV must be treated with caution and provide some basic estimates for identification accuracy with different pixelation levels. This study also highlights potential methods for improving performance in this task. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is a concerning lack of standardization of required CCTV installation, recording conditions, and image quality.
“While this global increase in CCTV data is beneficial to criminal investigation and facial comparison, there is a concerning lack of standardization of required installation, recording conditions, and image quality [20,82,89,90,91,92].”
From Forensic Facial Comparison: Current Status, Limitations, and Future Directions (2021) · cites this paper as [92]
The Introduction (page not available) says CCTV image quality is affected by factors such as lighting and contrast, and that the factors and levels of degradation are often difficult to define. The paper does not establish a lack of required standards for CCTV installation or recording conditions. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredA minimum horizontal pixel count of 10-16 per face for a known face and 20 pixels for an unknown face is considered the bare minimum for successful identification in frontal view.
“A minimum horizontal pixel count of 10–16 per face for a known face [121,123,124] and 20 pixels for an unknown face [92] is considered the bare minimum for successful identification in frontal view.”
From Forensic Facial Comparison: Current Status, Limitations, and Future Directions (2021) · cites this paper as [92]
For this source, the citing sentence attributes the 20-pixel figure for unknown faces. In Experiment 1, the Results report that matching accuracy exceeded chance at 20 horizontal pixels per face but not at 14 or 8. That supports 20 pixels as a threshold under those test conditions, not as a general bare minimum for successful identification: overall accuracy remained above chance at lower resolutions, and the paper studied matching an unfamiliar face against a high-quality photograph. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredMost systems are notably still lacking in applicability for facial comparison and are primarily disadvantaged not by installation and recording conditions but by image quality.
“Most systems are notably still lacking in applicability for facial comparison and are primarily disadvantaged not by installation and recording conditions but by image quality [20,82,89,90,92].”
From Forensic Facial Comparison: Current Status, Limitations, and Future Directions (2021) · cites this paper as [92]
The General Discussion reports that pixelation substantially impairs unfamiliar-face matching and makes comparison of CCTV footage with suspect photographs difficult. It does not assess whether most systems are unsuitable for facial comparison or establish that image quality, rather than installation and recording conditions, is their primary disadvantage; it links pixelation to camera resolution and subject distance. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 44
- 10.1080/09541449108406221 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/a0029635 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jarmac.2012.02.001 · DOI
- 10.1068/p6922 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0021893 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1982.tb01795.x · DOI
- 10.1080/14640749408401146 · DOI
- 10.1037/1076-898X.5.4.339 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.207 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2005.06.003 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02039.x · DOI
- 10.3758/BRM.42.1.286 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/1467-9280.00144 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1068/p230129 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BF03213093 · DOI · Paper page
- Costigan R., 2007, Identification from CCTV: The risk of injustice, Criminal Law Review, 591
- 10.1348/000712600161907 · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.1490 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.5334/pb-47-4-261 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01519-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1038/scientificamerican1173-70 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.180.4091.1194 · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.718 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S0010-0277(96)00785-8 · DOI
- Jenkins R., 2008, Limitations in facial identification: The evidence, Justice of the Peace, 172, 4
- 10.1098/rstb.2010.0379 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210902976969 · DOI
- 10.1002/1099-0720(200101/02)15:1<101::AID-ACP697>3.0.CO;2-7 · DOI
- Lee W. J., 2009, Matching unfamiliar faces from poor quality closed‐circuit television (CCTV) footage, AXIS, 1, 19
- 10.1080/713752567 · DOI
- 10.1037/1076-898X.9.1.33 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-1523.34.1.77 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03193433 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BF03193954 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/a0013464 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.03.003 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/s11896-011-9098-7 · DOI
- 10.1080/17470218.2011.575228 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/10683160903524333 · DOI
- 10.1038/305226a0 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00042-X · DOI
- 10.1016/j.visres.2011.08.009 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03199666 · DOI · Paper page
- White D., Feedback training for facial image comparison, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Forensic Facial Comparison: Current Status, Limitations, and Future Directions
Bacci, N., Davimes, J. G., Steyn, M., & Briers, N. (2021) · Biology · doi:10.3390/biology10121269 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Bindemann, M., Attard, J., Leach, A., & Johnston, R. A.
- Affiliations
- School of Psychology University of Kent Canterbury UK
- Venue
- Applied Cognitive Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 707-717
- ISSN
- 0888-4080
- 1099-0720
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
