Cited by 56

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Generalization across View in Face Memory and Face Matching

Estudillo, Alejandro J., Bindemann, Markus·2014·i-Perception

Abstract

While a change in view is considered to be one of the most damaging manipulations for facial identification, this phenomenon has been measured traditionally with tasks that confound perceptual processes with recognition memory. This study explored facial identification with a pairwise matching task to determine whether view generalization is possible when memory factors are minimised. Experiment 1 showed that the detrimental view effect in recognition memory is attenuated in face matching. Moreover, analysis of individual differences revealed that some observers can identify faces across view with perfect accuracy. This was replicated in Experiment 2, which also showed that view generalization is unaffected when only the internal facial features are shown. These results indicate that the view effect in recognition memory does not arise from data limits, whereby faces contain insufficient visual information to allow identification across views. Instead, these findings point to resource limits, within observers, that hamper such person identification in recognition memory.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1068/i0669

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Sample size in Experiment 2 was based on past research using a face matching paradigm.

    “Sample size was again based on past research using a face matching paradigm (Dowsett & Burton, 2015; Estudillo & Bindemann, 2014).”

    From Unfamiliar face matching with photographs of infants and children (2018) · cites this paper as Estudillo & Bindemann, 2014

  • Sample size in Experiment 1 was based on past research using a face matching paradigm.

    “Sample size was based on past research using a face matching paradigm (Dowsett & Burton, 2015; Estudillo & Bindemann, 2014).”

    From Unfamiliar face matching with photographs of infants and children (2018) · cites this paper as Estudillo & Bindemann, 2014

  • Face matching performance declines when task demands are increased, such as when viewpoint varies between the two images or there are long time periods between image captures.

    “and when task demands are increased (e.g., viewpoint varies in the two images: Estudillo & Bindemann, 2014; or there are long time periods between the two image captures: White et al., 2014).”

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: 39

  1. 10.1002/acp.2968 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Benton A. L., 1983, Contributions to Neuropsychological Assessment
  3. 10.1002/acp.2970 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1037/a0029635 · DOI · Paper page
  5. 10.1068/p7008 · DOI
  6. 10.1080/13506280244000168 · DOI
  7. 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1982.tb01795.x · DOI
  8. 10.1037/1076-898X.5.4.339 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1986.tb02199.x · DOI
  10. 10.3758/BRM.42.1.286 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1068/p3335 · DOI
  12. 10.1080/09541440340000439 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.03.010 · DOI
  14. 10.1068/p080431 · DOI
  15. Endo M., 1984, Tohoku Psychologica Folia, 43, 23
  16. 10.1037/a0027393 · DOI
  17. 10.1016/S0010-0277(96)00785-8 · DOI
  18. 10.1068/p230065 · DOI
  19. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0379 · DOI
  20. 10.1002/acp.2963 · DOI
  21. 10.1080/09658210902976969 · DOI
  22. 10.1162/jocn.2009.21080 · DOI
  23. 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199706)11:3<211::AID-ACP430>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI
  24. 10.1037/0021-9010.66.5.651 · DOI
  25. 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01558-8 · DOI
  26. 10.1002/acp.2967 · DOI
  27. 10.1037/0096-1523.34.1.77 · DOI
  28. 10.1080/20445911.2012.739153 · DOI
  29. 10.3758/BF03193433 · DOI · Paper page
  30. 10.3758/BF03193954 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.1037/a0013464 · DOI
  32. 10.1002/acp.2965 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1080/17470218.2011.575228 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90004-3 · DOI · Paper page
  35. 10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00042-X · DOI
  36. 10.1038/384404a0 · DOI
  37. 10.1068/p3101no · DOI
  38. 10.1068/p2901 · DOI
  39. 10.1068/p140737 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Estudillo, A. J., & Bindemann, M.
Affiliations
School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, UK
Venue
i-Perception
Published
2014-01-01
Volume
5
Issue
7
Pages
589-601
ISSN
2041-6695
Cited by
56
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