ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2026
Two Out of Three Ain't Bad: Aggregating Multiple Identification Decisions from the Same Observer Improves Unfamiliar Face Matching Performance.
Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Deciding whether two images show the same person sounds easy, but the average individual achieves accuracy of 60% to 90% on many unfamiliar face matching tasks. However, overall task performance can be improved by combining the identification decisions made by different individuals through the "wisdom of the crowd" effect. We investigated whether similar gains occur when combining multiple decisions made by the same individual, via a "wisdom of the crowd within" effect. Participants completed the same unfamiliar face matching task three times: in one session (Experiment 1), or over 3 weeks (Experiment 2). We found a wisdom of the crowd within effect in both experiments, which became significant after two responses and was larger with three. Surprisingly, the delay did not offer additional benefit. Though the crowd within improved performance, crowds of different individuals produced larger gains. Our results contribute to a growing literature showing that combined decision-making can improve unfamiliar face matching performance.
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.