The DOI matches its Crossref record.
These two are different. Yes, they’re the same: Choice blindness for facial identity
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?
Variability in criterion can explain why match and mismatch performance and old/new performance are often uncorrelated in behavioural experiments.
“Collectively, this can explain why match and mismatch performance and old/new performance is often uncorrelated in behavioural experiments (e.g., Fysh & Bindemann, 2023;Megreya & Burton, 2007;Megreya et al., 2011;Sauerland et al., 2016).”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Sauerland et al., 2016
Performance for match and mismatch trials is typically unrelated or correlated negatively.
“Contrary to this reasoning, performance for match and mismatch trials is typically unrelated or correlated negatively, whereby observers who are good at making one type of identification (e.g., that a face pair is an identity match) are poor at another (e.g., that a face pair is a mismatch; Fysh & Bindemann, 2023;Megreya & Burton, 2007;Sauerland et al., 2016).”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Sauerland et al., 2016
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: 27
- Beale, 1995, Categorical effects in the perception of faces, Cognition, 57, 217, 10.1016/0010-0277(95)00669-X · DOI
- Bruce, 2001, Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 207
- Crowne, 1960, A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology, Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24, 349, 10.1037/h0047358 · DOI · Paper page
- Davies, 2000, Closed-circuit television: How effective an identification aid?, British Journal of Psychology, 91, 411, 10.1348/000712600161907 · DOI
- Findley, 2006, The multiple dimensions of tunnel vision in criminal cases, Wisconsin Law Review, 2006, 291
- Gudjonsson, 1989, Compliance in an interrogative situation: A new scale, Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 535, 10.1016/0191-8869(89)90035-4 · DOI
- Hall, 2010, Magic at the marketplace: Choice blindness for the taste of jam and the smell of tea, Cognition, 117, 54, 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.06.010 · DOI
- Hancock, 2000, Recognition of unfamiliar faces, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 330, 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01519-9 · DOI · Paper page
- Jenkins, 2011, Stable face representations, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 366, 1671, 10.1098/rstb.2010.0379 · DOI
- Jenkins, 2011, Variability in photos of the same face, Cognition, 121, 313, 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001 · DOI
- Johansson, 2005, Failure to detect mismatches between intention and outcome in a simple decision task, Science, 310, 116, 10.1126/science.1111709 · DOI
- Johnston, 2009, Familiar and unfamiliar faces recognition: A review, Memory, 17, 577, 10.1080/09658210902976969 · DOI
- Megreya, 2007, Hits and false positives in face matching: A familiarity-based dissociation, Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 1175, 10.3758/BF03193954 · DOI · Paper page
- Meissner, 2005, Memory for own- and other-race faces: A dual-process approach, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 545, 10.1002/acp.1097 · DOI
- Merckelbach, 2011, Misinformation increases symptom reporting – A test – Retest experiment, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine Short Reports, 2
- Neumann, 2013, Viewers extract mean and individual identity from sets of famous faces, Cognition, 128, 56, 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.03.006 · DOI
- Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs – European Parliament (2009). A review of the increased use of CCTV and video-surveillance for crime prevention purposes in Europe (Note No. PE 419.588). <http://www.statewatch.org/news/2009/apr/ep-study-norris-cctv-video-surveillance.pdf>.
- Rothstein, 2004, Morphing Marilyn into Maggie dissociates physical and identity face representations in the brain, Nature Neuroscience, 8, 107, 10.1038/nn1370 · DOI
- Sagana, 2013, Witnesses’ blindness for their own facial recognition decisions: A field study, Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 31, 624, 10.1002/bsl.2082 · DOI
- Sagana, 2014, “This is the person you selected”: Eyewitnesses’ blindness for their own facial recognition decisions, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 753–764
- Sagana, 2015, The effect of choice reversals on blindness for identification decisions, Psychology, Crime & Law
- Saks, 2005, The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification science, Science, 309, 892, 10.1126/science.1111565 · DOI
- Salti, 2014, Cognitive dissonance resolution is related to episodic memory, PLoS ONE, 9, e108579, 10.1371/journal.pone.0108579 · DOI
- Sauerland, 2013, Theoretical and legal issues related to choice blindness for voices, Legal and Criminological Psychology, 18, 371, 10.1111/j.2044-8333.2012.02049.x · DOI
- Vokey, 1992, Familiarity, memorability, and the effect of typicality on the recognition of faces, Memory & Cognition, 20, 291, 10.3758/BF03199666 · DOI · Paper page
- Wells, 2003, Eyewitness testimony, Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 277, 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145028 · DOI
- Wickham, 2000, Facial distinctiveness: Its measurement, distribution and influence on immediate and delayed recognition, British Journal of Psychology, 91, 99, 10.1348/000712600161709 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A criterion-placement theory of face matching
Baker, K. A., Mondloch, C. J., Hancock, P. J. B., & Bindemann, M. (2026) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106319 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Sauerland, M., Sagana, A., Siegmann, K., Heiligers, D., Merckelbach, H., & Jenkins, R.
- ORCID
- Heiligers, Danitsja
- Venue
- Consciousness and Cognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-02
- Volume
- 40
- Pages
- 93-104
- ISSN
- 1053-8100
- Cited by
- 17
- 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
