Individual differences in eyewitness accuracy across multiple lineups of faces

Improving face identification of mask-wearing individuals

Research has consistently shown that concealing facial features can hinder subsequent identification. The widespread adoption of face masks due to the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the critical and urgent need to discover techniques to improve identification of people wearing face coverings. Despite years of research on face recognition and eyewitness identifications, there are currently no evidence-based recommendations for lineup construction for cases involving masked individuals. The purpose of this study was to examine identification accuracy of a masked perpetrator as a function of lineup type (i.e., unmasked or masked lineups) and perpetrator presence (i.e., absent or present). In both experiments, discriminability was superior for masked lineups, a result that was due almost exclusively to higher hits rates in target-present conditions. These data suggest that presenting a masked lineup can enhance identification of masked faces, and they have important implications for both eyewitness identification and everyday face recognition of people with face coverings.

When two fields collide: Identifying "super-recognisers" for neuropsychological and forensic face recognition research

In the last decade, a novel individual differences approach has emerged across the face recognition literature. While the field has long been concerned with prosopagnosia (the inability to recognise facial identity), it has more recently become clear that there are vast differences in face recognition ability within the typical population. "Super-recognisers" are those individuals purported to reside at the very top of this spectrum. On one hand, these people are of interest to cognitive neuropsychologists who are motivated to explore the commonality of the face recognition continuum, whereas on the other hand, researchers from the forensic face matching field evaluate the implementation of super-recognisers into real-world police and security settings. These two rather different approaches have led to discrepancies in the definition of super-recognisers, and perhaps more fundamentally, the approach to identifying them, resulting in a lack of consistency that prohibits theoretical progress. Here, we review the protocols used in published work to identify super-recognisers, and propose a common definition and screening recommendations that can be adhered to across fields.