Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35569049›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2022

The influence of familiarity on memory for faces and mask wearing.

Diana Kollenda, Benjamin de Haas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Diana KollendaExperimental Psychology, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany. diana.kollenda@psychol.uni-giessen.de.ORCID 0000-0002-8946-6100
Benjamin de HaasExperimental Psychology, Justus Liebig University, Giessen, Germany.

Funding

European Research Council 852885
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the wearing of face masks became mandatory in public areas or at workplaces in many countries. While offering protection, the coverage of large parts of our face (nose, mouth and chin) may have consequences for face recognition. This seems especially important in the context of contact tracing which can require memory of familiar and unfamiliar contacts and whether they were wearing a mask. In this study, we tested how well participants perform at remembering faces and whether they wore a mask, and if this depends on familiarity. Our results show that: (a) Participants remembered familiar faces better than unfamiliar ones, regardless of mask wearing. (b) Participants remembered unmasked faces better than masked faces, regardless of familiarity. (c) Participants were significantly worse at remembering whether an unfamiliar face was wearing a mask or not-even if they indicated remembering the face. (d) Participants showed a bias to indicate no memory of unfamiliar faces. (e) Participants showed a bias to indicate that unfamiliar faces wore a mask, even if they did not. In sum, it was harder to remember both, the identity of unfamiliar faces and whether they wore a mask. These findings have practical relevance for contact tracing and epidemic control.

Indexed as

COVID-19DiGeorge SyndromeHumansMasksMouthPandemicsRecognition, PsychologyFace masksFace recognitionFamiliarityMemory

Identifiers

PMID35569049
PMCPMC9107586

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.