Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39313677›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025

Information sampling differences supporting superior face identity processing ability.

James D Dunn, Sebastien Miellet, David White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. 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

3 authors.

James D DunnSchool of Psychology, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia. j.d.dunn@unsw.edu.au.
Sebastien MielletSchool of Psychology, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia.
David WhiteSchool of Psychology, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, 2052, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Face recognition in humans is often cited as a model example of perceptual expertise that is characterized by an increased tendency to process faces as holistic percepts. However emerging evidence across different domains of expertise points to a critical role of feature-based processing strategies during the initial encoding of information. Here, we examined the eye-movement patterns of super-recognisers-individuals with extremely high face identification ability compared with the average person-using gaze-contingent "spotlight" apertures that restrict visual face information in real time around their point of fixation. As an additional contrast, we also compared their performance with that of facial examiners-highly trained individuals whose superiority has been shown to rely heavily on featural processing. Super-recognisers and facial examiners showed equivalent face matching accuracy in both spotlight aperture and natural viewing conditions, suggesting that they were equally adept at using featural information for face identity processing. Further, both groups sampled more information across the face than controls. Together, these results show that the active exploration of facial features is an important determinant of face recognition ability that generalizes across different types of experts.

Indexed as

Eye MovementsFacial RecognitionPattern Recognition, VisualRecognition, PsychologyAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultFace perceptionFacial recognitionForensic facial examinersForensic scienceHolistic processingIndividual differencesSuper-recognisers

Identifiers

PMID39313677
PMCPMC12000253

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.