Whole-face procedures for recovering facial images from memory.

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

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

[3]  S. Coren,et al.  In Sensation and perception , 1979 .

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

[5]  Lionel Haward,et al.  Evaluating witness evidence: S. Llyod-Bostock and R. Clifford (Eds): Wiley, Chichester, England (1983). x + 305 pages. £19.95. , 1984 .

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

[7]  S. Carey,et al.  Why faces are and are not special: an effect of expertise. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[8]  S. Penrod,et al.  Meta-analysis of facial identification studies. , 1986 .

[9]  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 .

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

[11]  D. Perrett,et al.  Visual Processing of Facial Distinctiveness , 1994, Perception.

[12]  V. Bruce,et al.  Effects of lighting on the perception of facial surfaces. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Identification of computer-generated facial composites. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

[14]  Margaret Bull Kovera,et al.  Identification of computer-generated facial composites. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

[15]  Ronald P. Fisher,et al.  Constructing facial composites with the mac-a-mug pro system , 1997 .

[16]  Peter J. B. Hancock,et al.  Testing Principal Component Representations for Faces , 1997, NCPW.

[17]  D. Perrett,et al.  Presentation-Time Measures of the Effects of Manipulations in Colour Space on Discrimination of Famous Faces , 1997, Perception.

[18]  Garrett L. Berman,et al.  The influence of processing instructions at encoding and retrieval on face recognition accuracy , 1998 .

[19]  Roberto Cabeza,et al.  Features are Also Important: Contributions of Featural and Configural Processing to Face Recognition , 2000, Psychological science.

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

[21]  V. Bruce,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology When Inverted Faces Are Recognized: the Role of Configural Information in Face Recognition , 2022 .

[22]  V Bruce,et al.  Familiarisation with Faces Selectively Enhances Sensitivity to Changes Made to the Eyes , 2001, Perception.

[23]  G. Hole,et al.  Effects of Geometric Distortions on Face-Recognition Performance , 2002, Perception.

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

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

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

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

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

[29]  James Ward,et al.  Face Recognition in Pictures is Affected by Perspective Transformation but Not by the Centre of Projection , 2006, Perception.

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

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

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

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

[34]  Marvin M. Chun,et al.  How is spatial context learning integrated over signal versus noise? A primacy effect in contextual cueing , 2007, Visual cognition.

[35]  Edgar Erdfelder,et al.  G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.

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

[37]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  Evolving the Face of a Criminal: How to Search a Face Space More Effectively , 2007 .

[38]  Peter J. B. Hancock,et al.  An application of caricature: How to improve the recognition of facial composites , 2007 .

[39]  Vicki Bruce,et al.  Improving the quality of facial composites using a holistic cognitive interview. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

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

[41]  A. Kooijman,et al.  Using route and survey information to generate cognitive maps: differences between normally sighted and visually impaired individuals , 2009 .

[42]  S. Dakin,et al.  Psychophysical evidence for a non-linear representation of facial identity , 2009, Vision Research.

[43]  Forensic Psychology and Law , 2009 .

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

[45]  A. Dobson,et al.  Selecting the correct variance–covariance structure for longitudinal data in ecology : a comparison of the Akaike,quasi-information and deviance information criteria , 2009 .

[46]  Evolving facial composite systems , 2009 .

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

[48]  E. McKone,et al.  What shape are the neural response functions underlying opponent coding in face space? A psychophysical investigation , 2010, Vision Research.

[49]  Tim Valentine,et al.  Evolving and combining facial composites: between-witness and within-witness morphs compared. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[50]  V. Bruce,et al.  The psychology of face construction: Giving evolution a helping hand. , 2011 .

[51]  Peter J B Hancock,et al.  Familiarity effects in the construction of facial-composite images using modern software systems , 2011, Ergonomics.

[52]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  Catching more offenders with EvoFIT Facial Composites: Lab Research and Police Field Trials , 2011 .

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

[54]  Charlie Frowd.  Craniofacial Identification: Facial recall and computer composites , 2012 .

[55]  P. Hancock,et al.  Interviewing Techniques for Darwinian Facial-Composite Systems , 2012 .

[56]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  Understanding the multiframe caricature advantage for recognizing facial composites , 2012 .

[57]  Charlie D. Frowd,et al.  Catching Even More Offenders with EvoFIT Facial Composites , 2012, 2012 Third International Conference on Emerging Security Technologies.

[58]  Four heads are better than one , 2013 .