Consistency of Face Identity Processing: Basic & Translational Research

An AFC Lab Talk-Series Presentatio

Harnessing fast periodic visual stimulation to study face cognition: Sub‐processes, brain‐behavior relationships, and objectivity

Rossion et al. (2020) review over a decade of work investigating the neural basis of unfamiliar face individuation (FI)—the brain's ability to distinguish unfamiliar face identity—using fast periodic visual stimulation (FPVS). Though FPVS measures rapid, automatic processing, its value for studying vision and face cognition could be increased by addressing three important aspects

Determinants of Face Recognition: The Role of Target Prevalence and Similarity

Studies of facial identity processing typically assess perception (via matching) and/or memory (via recognition), with experimental designs differing with respect to one important aspect: Target Prevalence. Some designs include “target absent” (TA) among “target present” (TP) trials. In visual search tasks, TA trials shift an observer’s decisional criterion towards a stricter one, increasing misses. However, decisional biases will differ between individuals and across an individual’s decisions as well. In this way, excluding TA trials ensures comparable levels of expectation and thus a more controlled decisional bias both within and between observers by not considering correct rejections and false alarms. However, TA trials may occur, e.g., in police line-ups, where it is important to consider observers’ face recognition ability net of the potential biases introduced by TA and TP trials. And, while these have been investigated in numerous other stimulus domains, their effects have not yet been extended to face recognition. We therefore sought to fill this void by testing different versions of the previously established Models Memory Test, which measures old/new recognition of experimentally learned facial identities. Our study found significant expectation effects, driven by target prevalence that persist even given prevalence changes. This implies that face recognition – even measured with naturalistic changes – is influenced by prior perceptual decisions

Determinants of face recognition: the role of target prevalence and similarity

Studies of facial identity processing typically assess perception and/or recognition, with designs differing with respect to one important aspect: Target Prevalence. That is, some include “target absent” (TA) among “target present” (TP) trials. In visual search tasks, TA trials shift an observer’s decisional criterion towards a stricter one, increasing error rates. However, decisional biases will differ inter-individually and can change intra-individually as well. From one standpoint, excluding TA trials is logical as it ensures comparable levels of expectation, or decisional bias across observers, and tasks. However, in reality, TA trials may occur, e.g. in police line-ups, where it is important to consider observers’ face recognition ability independently for TA and TP trials. To our knowledge, the effect of including TA trials has not been systematically investigated in tests of face recognition. We sought to fill this void by testing different versions of the previously established Models Memory Test that measures old/new recognition of experimentally learned facial identities. Our study aimed to answer the open question of whether — and if, how — observer expectation matters in face recognition with naturalistic stimulus variations. We discuss implications for line-up scenarios that are simulated in research settings and occur regularly in policing

Determinants of face recognition: the role of target prevalence and similarity

Studies of facial identity processing typically assess perception and/or recognition, with designs differing with respect to one important aspect: Target Prevalence. That is, some include “target absent” (TA) among “target present” (TP) trials. In visual search tasks, TA trials shift an observer’s decisional criterion towards a stricter one, increasing error rates. However, decisional biases will differ inter-individually and can change intra-individually as well. From one standpoint, excluding TA trials is logical as it ensures comparable levels of expectation, or decisional bias across observers, and tasks. However, in reality, TA trials may occur, e.g. in police line-ups, where it is important to consider observers’ face recognition ability independently for TA and TP trials. To our knowledge, the effect of including TA trials has not been systematically investigated in tests of face recognition. We sought to fill this void by testing different versions of the previously established Models Memory Test that measures old/new recognition of experimentally learned facial identities. Our study aimed to answer the open question of whether — and if, how — observer expectation matters in face recognition with naturalistic stimulus variations. We discuss implications for line-up scenarios that are simulated in research settings and occur regularly in policing

Image or identity? Only Super-Recognizers’ (memor)ability is consistently viewpoint-invariant

A face’s memorability refers to the unique combination of its intrinsic visual features facilitating its later recognition. Despite considerable variation in face recognition ability amongst the general population, individuals show substantial concordance regarding the memorability of various faces. And, when the viewpoints across which identities are seen at encoding and recognition differ, such agreement persists, though to a lesser extent. Consequently, face recognition cannot rely solely on image-dependent encoding; individuals must extract some invariant facial information, robust to changes in viewpoint, to do so consistently. However, whether such consistency covaries with overall face processing ability is unclear. Here, therefore, in two experiments we tested recognition of (i) implicitly encoded face images and (ii) explicitly encoded identities in a group of normal control observers against a group of “Super-Recognizers” (SRs) who possess exceptional face processing skills. When implicit encoding was surreptitiously solicited, recognition of studied images was comparable between groups. Yet, when encoding was explicitly solicited, SRs more accurately recognized studied identities across viewpoint changes than normal observers. Critically, image-dependent information could only inform recognition in the first experiment, whereas viewpoint-invariant information could inform recognition consistently in both. Individualized profiles of observers’ performance (as a function of stimulus memorability) reveal that only SRs performed consistently between experiments. We suggest that SRs’ unique capacity for utilizing viewpoint-invariant information for recognition, regardless of encoding conditions, is rooted in fundamentally more accurate and robust representations of identity-based memorability. These results invite a reinterpretation of face memorability that describes viewpoint-invariant information, diagnostic of facial identity representations in memory