ReviewBritish journal of psychology (London, England : 1953)2026
The state of modelling face processing in humans with deep learning.
Review in British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparability between AI and human cognition and its role in psychological research and AI ethics.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Review
- The state of modelling face processing in humans with deep learning.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Review
- How AI can advance psychological science.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- Experience Alone Can Generate Human Face Specialization: Evidence From Deep Learning Models.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2026Article
- Review
- Super-recognizers sample visual information of superior computational value for facial recognition.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning models trained for facial recognition now surpass the highest performing human participants. Recent evidence suggests that they also model some qualitative aspects of face processing in humans. This review compares the current understanding of deep learning models with psychological models of the face processing system. Psychological models consist of two components that operate on the information encoded when people perceive a face, which we refer to here as 'face codes'. The first component, the core system, extracts face codes from retinal input that encode invariant and changeable properties. The second component, the extended system, links face codes to personal information about a person and their social context. Studies of face codes in existing deep learning models reveal some surprising results. For example, face codes in networks designed for identity recognition also encode expression information, which contrasts with psychological models that separate invariant and changeable properties. Deep learning can also be used to implement candidate models of the face processing system, for example to compare alternative cognitive architectures and codes that might support interchange between core and extended face processing systems. We conclude by summarizing seven key lessons from this research and outlining three open questions for future study.
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.