Generalization across view in face memory and face matching

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.

[1]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Stimulus-specific effects in face recognition over changes in viewpoint , 1998, Vision Research.

[2]  Daniel G Bobrow,et al.  On data-limited and resource-limited processes , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[3]  Raymond J. Dolan,et al.  Familiarity enhances invariance of face representations in human ventral visual cortex: fMRI evidence , 2005, NeuroImage.

[4]  V. Bruce.  Changing faces: visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition. , 1982, British journal of psychology.

[5]  Andrew J. Edmonds,et al.  EVIDENCE FOR DIFFERENT REPRESENTATIONS OF FAMILIAR AND UNFAMILIAR FACES , 2009 .

[6]  P. Hancock,et al.  Recovering faces from memory: the distracting influence of external facial features. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[7]  Robert A. Johnston,et al.  Introduction to Forensic Face Matching , 2013 .

[8]  R. Johnston,et al.  Demonstrating how unfamiliar faces become familiar using a face matching task , 2005 .

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

[10]  Avi Chaudhuri,et al.  Recognition of unfamiliar faces: three kinds of effects , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[11]  A. Mike Burton,et al.  N250 ERP Correlates of the Acquisition of Face Representations across Different Images , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

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

[14]  Andrew W Young,et al.  Learning faces from photographs. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  P. Schyns,et al.  Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition , 1997, Cognition.

[16]  Ahmed M. Megreya,et al.  Hits and false positives in face matching: A familiarity-based dissociation , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

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

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

[19]  Paul Miller,et al.  Verification of face identities from images captured on video. , 1999 .

[20]  Shiguang Shan,et al.  Effects of Image Preprocessing on Face Matching and Recognition in Human Observers , 2013 .

[21]  D Kersten,et al.  Viewpoint-Dependent Recognition of Familiar Faces , 1999, Perception.

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

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

[24]  Rob Jenkins,et al.  Stable face representations , 2011, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[25]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Getting to know you: How we learn new faces , 2003 .

[26]  G. Hole.  Configurational Factors in the Perception of Unfamiliar Faces , 1994, Perception.

[27]  Robert A. Johnston,et al.  Special Issue on Forensic Face Matching , 2013 .

[28]  Ahmed M. Megreya,et al.  Unfamiliar faces are not faces: Evidence from a matching task , 2006, Memory & cognition.

[29]  Ahmed M. Megreya,et al.  The Other-Race Effect does not Rely on Memory: Evidence from a Matching Task , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

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

[31]  John Stobo,et al.  United We Stand , 1993, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[32]  T. Poggio,et al.  I think I know that face... , 1996, Nature.

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

[34]  Ahmed M Megreya,et al.  Matching faces to photographs: poor performance in eyewitness memory (without the memory). , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

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

[36]  Kinya Maruyama,et al.  Effects of observer's attitude on the familiarity of faces: Using the difference in cue value between central and peripheral facial elements as an index of familiarity. , 1985 .

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

[38]  Frances L. Krouse.  Effects of pose, pose change, and delay on face recognition performance. , 1981 .

[39]  R. Johnston,et al.  Exploring Levels of Face Familiarity by Using an Indirect Face-Matching Measure , 2002, Perception.