ArticleBehavior research methods2022
The Oxford Face Matching Test: A non-biased test of the full range of individual differences in face perception.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed.
- Facial palsy reveals the sensorimotor contribution to facial-emotion recognition.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Item analyses of the 20-item prosopagnosia index using classical test theory and item response theory.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Article
- Globally famous, locally recognized: Cross-cultural validation of the use of Famous Faces Test in Croatia.Journal of neuropsychology · 2026Article
- Two Out of Three Ain't Bad: Aggregating Multiple Identification Decisions from the Same Observer Improves Unfamiliar Face Matching Performance.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2026Article
- Behavioural separation of face memory and face perception.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Automated face recognition assists with low-prevalence face identity mismatches but can bias users.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- Individuals who are 'super recognisers' show superior performance on independent measures of face perception, face memory, and face matching.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Constructing a cross-race face identity triad test.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Better face-name recall is associated with better face recognition ability.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2025Article
- Investigating the stability of individual differences in face recognition behavior.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- EGEFACE: A new face memory test with static and dynamic images.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Article
- Perceptual heterogeneity in developmental prosopagnosia is continuous, not categorical.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2024Article
- The Oxford Face Matching Test: Short-form alternative.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2024Article
- Designing and evaluating tasks to measure individual differences in experimental psychology: a tutorial.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Review
- The novel object-matching test (NOM Test): A psychometric measure of visual comparison ability.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- A novel, rapid, quantitative method for face discrimination.PloS one · 2024Article
- A new approach to diagnosing and researching developmental prosopagnosia: Excluded cases are impaired too.Behavior research methods · 2023Article
- Independent measurement of face perception, face matching, and face memory reveals impairments in face perception and memory, but not matching, in autism.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tests of face processing are typically designed to identify individuals performing outside of the typical range; either prosopagnosic individuals who exhibit poor face processing ability, or super recognisers, who have superior face processing abilities. Here we describe the development of the Oxford Face Matching Test (OFMT), designed to identify individual differences in face processing across the full range of performance, from prosopagnosia, through the range of typical performance, to super recognisers. Such a test requires items of varying difficulty, but establishing difficulty is problematic when particular populations (e.g., prosopagnosics, individuals with autism spectrum disorder) may use atypical strategies to process faces. If item difficulty is calibrated on neurotypical individuals, then the test may be poorly calibrated for atypical groups, and vice versa. To obtain items of varying difficulty, we used facial recognition algorithms to obtain face pair similarity ratings that are not biased towards specific populations. These face pairs were used as stimuli in the OFMT, and participants were required to judge whether the face images depicted the same individual or different individuals. Across five studies the OFMT was shown to be sensitive to individual differences in the typical population, and in groups of both prosopagnosic individuals and super recognisers. The test-retest reliability of the task was at least equivalent to the Cambridge Face Memory Test and the Glasgow Face Matching Test. Furthermore, results reveal, at least at the group level, that both face perception and face memory are poor in those with prosopagnosia, and are good in super recognisers.
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.