Learning the Moves: The Effect of Familiarity and Facial Motion on Person Recognition across Large Changes in Viewing Format

Familiarity with a face or person can support recognition in tasks that require generalization to novel viewing contexts. Using naturalistic viewing conditions requiring recognition of people from face or whole body gait stimuli, we investigated the effects of familiarity, facial motion, and direction of learning/test transfer on person recognition. Participants were familiarized with previously unknown people from gait videos and were tested on faces (experiment 1a) or were familiarized with faces and were tested with gait videos (experiment 1b). Recognition was more accurate when learning from the face and testing with the gait videos, than when learning from the gait videos and testing with the face. The repetition of a single stimulus, either the face or gait, produced strong recognition gains across transfer conditions. Also, the presentation of moving faces resulted in better performance than that of static faces. In experiment 2, we investigated the role of facial motion further by testing recognition with static profile images. Motion provided no benefit for recognition, indicating that structure-from-motion is an unlikely source of the motion advantage found in the first set of experiments.

[1]  Azriel Rosenfeld,et al.  Face recognition: A literature survey , 2003, CSUR.

[2]  Alan Johnston,et al.  Motion as a cue for viewpoint invariance , 2005 .

[3]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Recognizing Famous Faces: Exploring the Benefits of Facial Motion , 2000 .

[4]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Evaluating the effectiveness of pixelation and blurring on masking the identity of familiar faces , 2001 .

[5]  T. Allison,et al.  Social perception from visual cues: role of the STS region , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  K. Lander,et al.  Why are moving faces easier to recognize? , 2005, Visual Cognition.

[7]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Psychological and Neural Perspectives on Human Face Recognition , 2005 .

[8]  A. Johnston,et al.  The Role of Movement in Face Recognition , 1997 .

[9]  C. Liu,et al.  Face recognition with perspective transformation , 2003, Vision Research.

[10]  C. Liu,et al.  Face recognition is robust with incongruent image resolution: relationship to security video images. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[11]  V. Bruce,et al.  The role of movement in the recognition of famous faces , 1999, Memory & cognition.

[12]  Wendy L. Braje,et al.  Illumination effects in face recognition , 1998, Psychobiology.

[13]  J. Haxby,et al.  The distributed human neural system for face perception , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[14]  V. Bruce,et al.  The role of dynamic information in the recognition of unfamiliar faces , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[15]  Avi Chaudhuri,et al.  Reassessing the 3/4 view effect in face recognition , 2002, Cognition.

[16]  Stephane J. M. Rainville,et al.  The effects of spatial frequency overlap on face recognition. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  The role of motion in learning new faces , 2003 .

[18]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Psychological and neural perspectives on the role of motion in face recognition. , 2003, Behavioral and cognitive neuroscience reviews.

[19]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Matching the faces of robbers captured on video , 2001 .

[20]  H. Bülthoff,et al.  The use of facial motion and facial form during the processing of identity , 2003, Vision Research.

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

[22]  G. Pike,et al.  Recognizing moving faces: The relative contribution of motion and perspective view information. , 1997 .

[23]  H. Bülthoff,et al.  Face recognition under varying poses: The role of texture and shape , 1996, Vision Research.

[24]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Recognizing moving faces: a psychological and neural synthesis , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[26]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The Fusiform Face Area: A Module in Human Extrastriate Cortex Specialized for Face Perception , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[27]  Z. Kourtzi,et al.  A Matching Advantage for Dynamic Human Faces , 2002, Perception.

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

[29]  Gezinus Wolters,et al.  Familiar face recognition as a function of distance and illumination: a practical tool for use in the courtroom , 1996 .

[30]  Familiar face recognition as a function of distance and illumination: a practical tool for use in the courtroom , 2005 .

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

[32]  V. Bruce,et al.  Face Recognition in Poor-Quality Video: Evidence From Security Surveillance , 1999 .

[33]  V. Bruce,et al.  Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

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

[35]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Learning new faces , 2002 .

[36]  Matthew Flatt,et al.  PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers , 1993 .

[37]  A. Johnston,et al.  Categorizing sex and identity from the biological motion of faces , 2001, Current Biology.

[38]  G. Bower,et al.  Depth of processing pictures of faces and recognition memory , 1974 .

[39]  Alice J. O'Toole,et al.  A video database of moving faces and people , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.