The Kent Face Matching Test

This study presents the Kent Face Matching Test (KFMT), which comprises 200 same-identity and 20 different-identity pairs of unfamiliar faces. Each face pair consists of a photograph from a student ID card and a high-quality portrait that was taken at least three months later. The test is designed to complement existing resources for face-matching research, by providing a more ecologically valid stimulus set that captures the natural variability that can arise in a person's appearance over time. Two experiments are presented to demonstrate that the KFMT provides a challenging measure of face matching but correlates with established tests. Experiment 1 compares a short version of this test with the optimized Glasgow Face Matching Test (GFMT). In Experiment 2, a longer version of the KFMT, with infrequent identity mismatches, is correlated with performance on the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) and the Cambridge Face Perception Test (CFPT). The KFMT is freely available for use in face-matching research.

[1]  M. Bindemann,et al.  Matching Faces Against the Clock , 2016, i-Perception.

[2]  K. Nakayama,et al.  The Cambridge Face Memory Test: Results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants , 2006, Neuropsychologia.

[3]  Jonathan W. Peirce,et al.  PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[4]  Ahmed M. Megreya,et al.  Individual differences in personality and face identification , 2013 .

[5]  Sarah Bate,et al.  Solving the Border Control Problem: Evidence of Enhanced Face Matching in Individuals with Extraordinary Face Recognition Skills , 2016, PloS one.

[6]  Tim Rakow,et al.  Who can recognize unfamiliar faces? Individual differences and observer consistency in person identification. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[7]  A. Burton,et al.  The Glasgow Face Matching Test , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[8]  A. Burton,et al.  Unfamiliar face matching: Pairs out-perform individuals and provide a route to training. , 2015, British journal of psychology.

[9]  Heather J. Ferguson,et al.  Perceptual and Memorial Contributions to Developmental Prosopagnosia , 2017, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[10]  David J. Robertson,et al.  From policing to passport control: the limitations of photo ID , 2015 .

[11]  A. McNeill,et al.  Facial Wipes don't Wash: Facial Image Comparison by Video Superimposition Reduces the Accuracy of Face Matching Decisions , 2016 .

[12]  Robert A. Johnston,et al.  The Effect of Image Pixelation on Unfamiliar‐Face Matching , 2013 .

[13]  G. Pike,et al.  When Seeing should not be Believing: Photographs, Credit Cards and Fraud , 1997 .

[14]  Dr R. Jenkins,et al.  Limitations in Facial Identification : The Evidence , 2008 .

[15]  Matthew Q. Hill,et al.  Perceptual expertise in forensic facial image comparison , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[16]  Matthew Q. Hill,et al.  Perceptual expertise in forensic facial image comparison | NIST , 2015 .

[17]  Ahmed M. Megreya,et al.  Matching Face Images Taken on the Same Day or Months Apart: the Limitations of Photo ID , 2013 .

[18]  D. White,et al.  Perceptual impairment in face identification with poor sleep , 2016, Royal Society Open Science.

[19]  Robert A. Johnston,et al.  Face matching in a long task: enforced rest and desk-switching cannot maintain identification accuracy , 2015, PeerJ.

[20]  Markus Bindemann,et al.  Finding needles in haystacks: identity mismatch frequency and facial identity verification. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[21]  Markus Bindemann,et al.  Generalization across view in face memory and face matching , 2014, i-Perception.

[22]  Katie L McMahon,et al.  The locus of taboo context effects in picture naming , 2017, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[23]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article Cognitive Neuropsychology Family Resemblance: Ten Family Members with Prosopagnosia and Within-class Object Agnosia , 2022 .

[24]  Rob Jenkins,et al.  Face Recognition by Metropolitan Police Super-Recognisers , 2016, PloS one.

[25]  Sarah Bate,et al.  Eye-Movement Strategies in Developmental Prosopagnosia and “Super” Face Recognition , 2017, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[26]  Markus Bindemann,et al.  The Effect of Feedback on Face‐Matching Accuracy , 2013 .

[27]  A. Burton,et al.  Face Matching Impairment in Developmental Prosopagnosia , 2017, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[28]  Markus Bindemann,et al.  Sex differences in unfamiliar face identification: evidence from matching tasks. , 2011, Acta psychologica.

[29]  Markus Bindemann,et al.  Me, Myself, and I: Different Recognition Rates for Three Photo-IDs of the Same Person , 2011, Perception.

[30]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Super-recognizers: People with extraordinary face recognition ability , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[31]  Michael G. Strintzis,et al.  Face Recognition , 2008, Encyclopedia of Multimedia.

[32]  Yusuke Yamani,et al.  広島大学学術情報リポジトリ Hiroshima University Institutional Repository Title Early Visual Perception Potentiated by Object Affordances : Evidence From a Temporal Order Judgment Task , 2022 .

[33]  A. Mike Burton,et al.  Passport Checks: Interactions Between Matching Faces and Biographical Details , 2016 .

[34]  A. Burton,et al.  Passport Officers’ Errors in Face Matching , 2014, PloS one.

[35]  Peter J. B. Hancock,et al.  Super‐recognisers in Action: Evidence from Face‐matching and Face Memory Tasks , 2015, Applied cognitive psychology.

[36]  David White,et al.  Feedback training for facial image comparison , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.