Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32822441›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Human-algorithm teaming in face recognition: How algorithm outcomes cognitively bias human decision-making.

John J Howard, Laura R Rabbitt, Yevgeniy B Sirotin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Time Pressure Increases Automation Reliance in a Face Matching Task.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Warning people about the risk of AI error mitigates human acquisition of AI bias.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Artificial intelligence in forensic medicine and forensic dentistry.The Journal of forensic odonto-stomatology · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

John J HowardMaryland Test Facility (MdTF), Upper Marlboro, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0136-9865
Laura R RabbittMaryland Test Facility (MdTF), Upper Marlboro, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3571-173X
Yevgeniy B SirotinMaryland Test Facility (MdTF), Upper Marlboro, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-7058-0424

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In face recognition applications, humans often team with algorithms, reviewing algorithm results to make an identity decision. However, few studies have explicitly measured how algorithms influence human face matching performance. One study that did examine this interaction found a concerning deterioration of human accuracy in the presence of algorithm errors. We conducted an experiment to examine how prior face identity decisions influence subsequent human judgements about face similarity. 376 volunteers were asked to rate the similarity of face pairs along a scale. Volunteers performing the task were told that they were reviewing identity decisions made by different sources, either a computer or human, or were told to make their own judgement without prior information. Replicating past results, we found that prior identity decisions, presented as labels, influenced volunteers' own identity judgements. We extend these results as follows. First, we show that the influence of identity decision labels was independent of indicated decision source (human or computer) despite volunteers' greater distrust of human identification ability. Second, applying a signal detection theory framework, we show that prior identity decision labels did not reduce volunteers' attention to the face pair. Discrimination performance was the same with and without the labels. Instead, prior identity decision labels altered volunteers' internal criterion used to judge a face pair as "matching" or "non-matching". This shifted volunteers' face pair similarity judgements by a full step along the response scale. Our work shows how human face matching is affected by prior identity decision labels and we discuss how this may limit the total accuracy of human-algorithm teams performing face matching tasks.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsDecision MakingFacial RecognitionRecognition, PsychologyAdolescentAdultAgedBiasFemaleHumansJudgmentMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID32822441
PMCPMC7444527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.