The psychology of face construction: Giving evolution a helping hand.

Face construction by selecting individual facial features rarely produces recognisable images. We have been developing a system called EvoFIT that works by the repeated selection and breeding of complete faces. Here, we explored two techniques. The first blurred the external parts of the face, to help users focus on the important central facial region. The second, manipulated an evolved face using psychologically-useful ‘holistic’ scales: age, masculinity, honesty, etc. Using face construction procedures that mirrored police work, a large benefit emerged for the holistic scales; the benefit of blurring accumulated over the construction process. Performance was best using both techniques: EvoFITs were correctly named 24.5% on average compared to 4.2% for faces constructed using a typical ‘feature’ system. It is now possible, therefore, to evolve a fairly recognisable composite from a 2 day memory of a face, the norm for real witnesses. A plausible model to account for the findings is introduced. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  A. Young,et al.  Understanding face recognition. , 1986, British journal of psychology.

[2]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  Effecting an Improvement to the Fitness Function. How to Evolve a More Identifiable Face , 2008, 2008 Bio-inspired, Learning and Intelligent Systems for Security.

[3]  H D Ellis,et al.  Remembering faces: acknowledging our limitations. , 1978, Journal - Forensic Science Society.

[4]  C. Frowd,et al.  The benefit of hair for the construction of facial composite images , 2009 .

[5]  G. Davies,et al.  Face recall: an examination of some factors limiting composite production accuracy. , 1982, The Journal of applied psychology.

[6]  G Davies,et al.  Facial composite production: a comparison of mechanical and computer-driven systems. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  Contemporary composite techniques: The impact of a forensically-relevant target delay. , 2005 .

[8]  V. Bruce,et al.  Changing the face of criminal identification , 2008 .

[9]  V. Bruce,et al.  Parallel approaches to composite production: interfaces that behave contrary to expectation , 2007, Ergonomics.

[10]  V. Bruce,et al.  Recognition of unfamiliar faces , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  T. Valentine The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology a Unified Account of the Effects of Distinctiveness, Inversion, and Race in Face Recognition , 2022 .

[12]  G. Pike,et al.  Identifying composites of famous faces: Investigating memory, language and system issues , 2006 .

[13]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  Implementing Holistic Dimensions for a Facial Composite System , 2006, J. Multim..

[14]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  EvoFIT: A holistic, evolutionary facial imaging technique for creating composites , 2004, TAP.

[15]  H. Ellis,et al.  Identification of Familiar and Unfamiliar Faces from Internal and External Features: Some Implications for Theories of Face Recognition , 1979, Perception.

[16]  Amina Memon,et al.  Eyewitness Evidence , 2006, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[17]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  The relative importance of external and internal features of facial composites. , 2007, British journal of psychology.

[18]  H. Ellis Face recall: A psychological perspective. , 1986 .

[19]  Timothy R. Jordan,et al.  Determining the influence of Gaussian blurring on inversion effects with talking faces , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  A. Young,et al.  Matching Familiar and Unfamiliar Faces on Internal and External Features , 1985, Perception.

[21]  V. Bruce,et al.  Local and Relational Aspects of Face Distinctiveness , 1998, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[22]  David Nunez,et al.  An evaluation of ID: an eigenface based construction system , 2006, South Afr. Comput. J..

[23]  P. Hancock,et al.  An evaluation of US systems for facial composite production , 2007, Ergonomics.

[24]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  A forensically valid comparison of facial composite systems , 2005 .

[25]  M. Farah,et al.  Parts and Wholes in Face Recognition , 1993, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[26]  Philip J. Benson,et al.  When does the inner-face advantage in familiar face recognition arise and why? , 1999 .

[27]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  The effects of encoding strategy and context change on face recognition. , 1983 .

[28]  Graham Davies,et al.  Recognizing faces in and out of context , 1982 .

[29]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Context effects in episodic studies of verbal and facial memory: A review , 1985 .

[30]  Jackie Phahlamohlaka,et al.  Amartya Sen's Capability Approach applied to Information Systems research , 2006, South Afr. Comput. J..

[31]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Four heads are better than one: combining face composites yields improvements in face likeness. , 2002, The Journal of applied psychology.

[32]  Christopher J. Solomon,et al.  New methodology in facial composite construction: from theory to practice , 2009, Int. J. Electron. Secur. Digit. Forensics.