ArticleBritish journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)2025
Face and voice identity matching accuracy is not improved by multimodal identity information.
Article in British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Human detection of AI-generated faces and voices is not domain-general.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Face and voice identity matching accuracy is not improved by multimodal identity information.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2025Article
- Article
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
Identity verification from both faces and voices can be error-prone. Previous research has shown that faces and voices signal concordant information and cross-modal unfamiliar face-to-voice matching is possible, albeit often with low accuracy. In the current study, we ask whether performance on a face or voice identity matching task can be improved by using multimodal stimuli which add a second modality (voice or face). We find that overall accuracy is higher for face matching than for voice matching. However, contrary to predictions, presenting one unimodal and one multimodal stimulus within a matching task did not improve face or voice matching compared to presenting two unimodal stimuli. Additionally, we find that presenting two multimodal stimuli does not improve accuracy compared to presenting two unimodal face stimuli. Thus, multimodal information does not improve accuracy. However, intriguingly, we find that cross-modal face-voice matching accuracy predicts voice matching accuracy but not face matching accuracy. This suggests cross-modal information can nonetheless play a role in identity matching, and face and voice information combine to inform matching decisions. We discuss our findings in light of current models of person perception, and consider the implications for identity verification in security and forensic settings.
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.