The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Unfamiliar Face Matching With Frontal and Profile Views
Abstract
Research has systematically examined how laboratory participants and real-world practitioners decide whether two face photographs show the same person or not using frontal images. In contrast, research has not examined face matching using profile images. In Experiment 1, we ask whether matching unfamiliar faces is easier with frontal compared with profile views. Participants completed the original, frontal version of the Glasgow Face Matching Test, and also an adapted version where all face pairs were presented in profile. There was no difference in performance across the two tasks, suggesting that both views were similarly useful for face matching. Experiments 2 and 3 examined whether matching unfamiliar faces is improved when both frontal and profile views are provided. We compared face matching accuracy when both a frontal and a profile image of each face were presented, with accuracy using each view alone. Surprisingly, we found no benefit when both views were presented together in either experiment. Overall, these results suggest that either frontal or profile views provide substantially overlapping information regarding identity or participants are unable to utilise both sources of information when making decisions. Each of these conclusions has important implications for face matching research and real-world identification development.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
The advantage of displaying only internal features was limited to the most difficult trials only and failed to generalise to a card sorting task.
“However, this advantage was limited to the most difficult trials only and failed to generalise to a card sorting task (Kramer et al., 2018).”
From Unfamiliar face matching with photographs of infants and children (2018) · cites this paper as Kramer et al., 2018
External features (hair, facial outline, etc.) contain less identity information.
“given that the external features (hair, facial outline, etc.) contain less identity information (Kramer et al., 2018).”
From Unfamiliar face matching with photographs of infants and children (2018) · cites this paper as Kramer et al., 2018
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 27
- Baddeley A., 1983, Evaluating witness evidence, 125
- 10.1002/acp.2970 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0148148 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/acp.3170 · DOI
- 10.1037/1076-898X.5.4.339 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.207 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BRM.42.1.286 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/bjop.12103 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1068/i0669 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01519-9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1126/science.1149656 · DOI
- 10.1098/rstb.2010.0379 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001 · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.3239 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/acp.3261 · DOI
- 10.1167/15.4.1 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00164-0 · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.2350010108 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0024356 · DOI
- 10.3758/BF03193433 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/a0013464 · DOI
- 10.1080/17470218.2011.575228 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0150036 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.visres.2005.10.024 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.visres.2016.12.014 · DOI
- 10.1037/xap0000009 · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.2971 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Unfamiliar face matching with photographs of infants and children
Kramer, R. S. S., Mulgrew, J., & Reynolds, M. G. (2018) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.5010 · Cited by 15
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Kramer, R. S. S., & Reynolds, M. G.
- Affiliations
- School of Psychology, University of Lincoln, UK; Department of Psychology, Trent University, Peterborough, ON, Canada; Department of Psychology, University of York, UK
- Department of Psychology, Trent University, Peterborough, ON, Canada
- Venue
- Perception
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-02-05
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 414-431
- ISSN
- 0301-0066
- 1468-4233
- Cited by
- 19
- 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