Understanding how unfamiliar faces become familiar: Introduction to a special issue on face learning

Unfamiliar face matching ability predicts the slope of face learning

We provide the first examination of individual differences in the efficiency of face learning. Investigating individual differences in face learning can illuminate potential mechanisms and provide greater understanding of why certain individuals might be more efficient face learners. Participants completed two unfamiliar face matching tasks and a learning task in which learning was assessed after viewing 1, 3, 6, and 9 images of to-be-learned identities. Individual differences in the slope of face learning (i.e., increases in sensitivity to identity) were predicted by the ability to discriminate between matched (same-identity) vs. mismatched (different-identity) pairs of wholly unfamiliar faces. A Dual Process Signal Detection model showed that three parameters increased with learning: Familiarity (an unconscious type of memory that varies in strength), recollection-old (conscious recognition of a learned identity), and recollection-new (conscious/confident rejection of novel identities). Good (vs. poor) matchers had higher Recollection-Old scores throughout learning and showed a steeper increase in Recollection-New. We conclude that good matchers are better able to capitalize on exposure to within-person variability in appearance, an effect that is attributable to their conscious memory for both learned and novel faces. These results have applied implications and will inform contemporary and traditional models of face identification.

Validation of forensic facial comparison by morphological analysis in photographic and CCTV samples

Between the ever-increasing availability of surveillance evidence and expert-based forensic facial comparison being considered admissible in court, confirming its validity is paramount. Facial comparison is most commonly conducted using morphological analysis (MA), a largely untested feature-based approach. This study aimed at validating the current recommended practice of MA in both standardised and suboptimal surveillance samples. Face pools of 175 South African males were compiled with a series of facial photographs, using images from the Wits Face Database. The first 75 face pools consisted of wildtype (unstandardised) high-quality target photographs, while the remaining 100 face pools consisted of suboptimal closed-circuit television (CCTV) target images. Target images were compared to high-quality standardised photographs. Face pools were analysed using the Facial Identification Scientific Working Group's guidelines and feature list. Confusion matrices were used to determine the performance of MA in each cohort. MA was found highly accurate (chance-corrected accuracy (CCA): 99.1%) and reliable (κ = 0.921) in the photographic sample and less accurate (CCA: 82.6%) and reliable (κ = 0.743), in the CCTV sample. Higher false-positive and false-negative rates were noted for the CCTV sample, with the majority of errors resulting in false-negative outcomes. The decreased performance in the CCTV sample was attributed to various factors including image quality, angle of recording and lighting. Other studies testing facial comparison identified lower accuracies and reliability across various conditions. Better performance was found here and in other studies that included some form of facial feature list, reinforcing the importance of using a systematic facial feature list.

Faces, people and the brain: The 45th Sir Frederic Bartlett Lecture

The fact that the face is a source of diverse social signals allows us to use face and person perception as a model system for asking important psychological questions about how our brains are organised. A key issue concerns whether we rely primarily on some form of generic representation of the common physical source of these social signals (the face) to interpret them, or instead create multiple representations by assigning different aspects of the task to different specialist components. Variants of the specialist components hypothesis have formed the dominant theoretical perspective on face perception for more than three decades, but despite this dominance of formally and informally expressed theories, the underlying principles and extent of any division of labour remain uncertain. Here, I discuss three important sources of constraint: first, the evolved structure of the brain; second, the need to optimise responses to different everyday tasks; and third, the statistical structure of faces in the perceiver’s environment. I show how these constraints interact to determine the underlying functional organisation of face and person perception.