ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2020
Normative data for two challenging tests of face matching under ecological conditions.
Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Upright and inverted unfamiliar face-matching tasks - everything correlates everywhere all at once.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- Super-Recognizers, or Su-Perceivers? Insights from fast periodic visual stimulation (FPVS) EEG.Brain topography · 2025Article
- Listeners are biased towards voices of young speakers and female speakers when discriminating voices.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- EGEFACE: A new face memory test with static and dynamic images.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- The role of expansion and adaptability of face-space for individual differences in face identity processing.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Article
- Determinants of Face Recognition: The Role of Target Prevalence and Similarity.Journal of cognition · 2024Article
- Improving forensic perpetrator identification with Super-Recognizers.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Unfamiliar face matching ability predicts the slope of face learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Recognition of Masked Faces in the Era of the Pandemic: No Improvement Despite Extensive Natural Exposure.Psychological science · 2022Article
- Characteristic fixation biases in Super-Recognizers.Journal of vision · 2022Article
- When two fields collide: Identifying "super-recognisers" for neuropsychological and forensic face recognition research.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2021Review
- Face processing in police service: the relationship between laboratory-based assessment of face processing abilities and performance in a real-world identity matching task.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021Article
- Psychophysical profiles in super-recognizers.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- When experience does not promote expertise: security professionals fail to detect low prevalence fake IDs.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021Article
- Differences between and within individuals, and subprocesses of face cognition: implications for theory, research and personnel selection.Royal Society open science · 2020Article
- Article
- Towards a 'manifesto' for super-recognizer research.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnfamiliar face processing is an ability that varies considerably between individuals. Numerous studies have aimed to identify its underlying determinants using controlled experimental procedures. While such tests can isolate variables that influence face processing, they usually involve somewhat unrealistic situations and optimized face images as stimulus material. As a consequence, the extent to which the performance observed under laboratory settings is informative for predicting real-life proficiency remains unclear.
resultsWe present normative data for two ecologically valid but underused tests of face matching: the Yearbook Test (YBT) and the Facial Identity Card Sorting Test (FICST). The YBT (n = 252) measures identity matching across substantial age-related changes in facial appearance, while the FICST (n = 218) assesses the ability to process unfamiliar facial identity despite superficial image variations. To determine the predictive value of both tests, a subsample of our cohort (n = 181) also completed a commonly used test of face recognition and two tests of face perception (the long form of the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT+), the Expertise in Facial Comparison Test (EFCT) and the Person Identification Challenge Test (PICT)).
conclusionsFocusing on the top performers identified independently per test, we made two important observations: 1) YBT and FICST performance can predict CFMT+ scores and vice versa; and 2) EFCT and PICT scores neither reliably predict superior performance in ecologically meaningful and challenging tests of face matching, nor in the most commonly used test of face recognition. These findings emphasize the necessity for using challenging and ecologically relevant, and thus highly sensitive, tasks of unfamiliar face processing to identify high-performing individuals in the normal population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.