ArticlePsychological research2024
Taylor Swift does not boost face recognition in reaction time-based Concealed Information Test: investigating target-familiarity effects.
Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Eyewitness identifications from lineups are prone to error. More indirect identification procedures, such as the reaction-time based Concealed Information Test (RT-CIT) could be a viable alternative to lineups. The RT-CIT uses response times to assess facial familiarity. Theory and initial evidence with autobiographical stimuli suggests that the accuracy of RT-CIT can be augmented when participants' reliance on familiarity-based responding increases. We tested this assumption in two pre-registered experiments with 173 participants. Participants witnessed a mock crime. In the subsequent RT-CIT protocol, participants reacted to probe faces from the mock crime video, to irrelevant faces, and to target faces that required a unique response. Targets were either unknown people or were well-known celebrities (e.g., Taylor Swift). As expected, reaction times were longer to probes than to irrelevants in all conditions, indicating a CIT effect. Contrasting our pre-registered predictions, the CIT effect was not larger in the familiar condition (Experiment 1: unfamiliar targets: d = 0.77 vs. celebrity targets: d = 0.24; Experiment 2: unfamiliar targets: d = 1.09 vs. celebrity targets: d = 0.79). This suggests that familiar targets did not increase the validity of the RT-CIT in diagnosing concealed face recognition. A potential lack of saliency of the familiar targets might explain these unexpected findings. Of note, we did find medium to large effect sizes overall, speaking to the potential of diagnosing face recognition with the RT-CIT.
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.