The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Identity Documents Bias Face Matching
Abstract
Unfamiliar face matching is a difficult task. In typical experiments, viewers see isolated face pairs and have to decide whether they show the same or different people. Recent research shows that embedding faces into passports introduces a response bias, such that viewers are more likely to accept two pictures as showing the same person. Here, we investigate the cause of this bias. In a series of experiments, we vary the apparent authority of the identity documents, testing passports, driving licences, and student ID. By comparison to isolated face matching, the results show a bias towards responding same person for each document type. However, when ID information (name, date of birth, etc.) was removed from documents, the induced bias disappeared. We conclude that bias does not rely on perceived authority, but instead seems to occur only in the presence of identifying information, despite that being task irrelevant.
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?
Criterion is influenced by the applied context in which face matching is studied.
“as well as the applied context in which face matching is studied (e.g., Bindemann et al., 2022;Feng & Burton, 2019, 2021;McCaffery & Burton, 2016;Tummon et al., 2019)”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Feng & Burton, 2019
Citations
Cites
Young, A. W., & Burton, A. M. (2018) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2017.11.007 · Cited by 235 · cited 1×
“Email: mike.burton@york.ac.uk recognition, which is very robust over a large range of settings (Johnston & Edmonds, 2009; Young & Burton, 2018).”
BackgroundSelf-citationDo professional facial image comparison training courses work?
Towler, A., Kemp, R. I., Burton, A. M., Dunn, J. D., Wayne, T., Moreton, R., & White, D. (2019) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0211037 · Cited by 111
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- 10.1068/p7008 · DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0148148 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.concog.2005.06.001 · DOI
- 10.1186/s41235-018-0109-4 · DOI · Paper page
- 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
- 10.1068/p3335 · DOI
- 10.1111/bjop.12260 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BF03194801 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658210902976969 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.01.001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199706)11:3<211::AID-ACP430>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI
- 10.1111/1467-9280.03453 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/acp.3281 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/BF03193433 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/a0013464 · DOI
- 10.1002/acp.2965 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0033-2909.116.2.220 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1073/pnas.1721355115 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0103510 · DOI · Paper page
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
- Feng, X., & Burton, A. M.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychology, University of York, UK
- ORCID
- Burton, A. Mike
- Venue
- Perception
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-09-24
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1163-1174
- ISSN
- 0301-0066
- 1468-4233
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 2
- 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