Perceptual Expertise of Forensic Examiners and Reviewers on Tests of Cross-Race and Disguised Face Identification and Face Memory

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Applied Cognitive Psychology Pub Date : 2024-12-04 DOI:10.1002/acp.70002
Amy N. Yates, Jacqueline G. Cavazos, Géraldine Jeckeln, Ying Hu, Eilidh Noyes, Carina A. Hahn, Alice J. O'Toole, P. Jonathon Phillips
{"title":"Perceptual Expertise of Forensic Examiners and Reviewers on Tests of Cross-Race and Disguised Face Identification and Face Memory","authors":"Amy N. Yates,&nbsp;Jacqueline G. Cavazos,&nbsp;Géraldine Jeckeln,&nbsp;Ying Hu,&nbsp;Eilidh Noyes,&nbsp;Carina A. Hahn,&nbsp;Alice J. O'Toole,&nbsp;P. Jonathon Phillips","doi":"10.1002/acp.70002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Forensic facial professionals have been shown in previous studies to identify people from frontal face images more accurately than untrained participants when given 30 s per face pair. We tested whether this superiority holds in more challenging conditions. Two groups of forensic facial professionals (examiners, reviewers) and untrained participants were tested in three lab-based tasks: other-race face identification, disguised face identification, and face memory. For other-race face identification, on same-race faces, examiners were superior to controls; on different-race identification, examiners and controls performed comparably. Examiners were superior to controls for impersonation disguise, but not consistently superior for evasion disguise. Examiners' performance on the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT+) was marginally better than reviewers and controls. We conclude that under laboratory-style conditions, professional examiners' identification superiority does not generalize completely to other-race and disguised faces. Future work should administer other-race and disguise face identification tests that allow forensic professionals to follow methods and procedures they typically use in casework.</p>","PeriodicalId":48281,"journal":{"name":"Applied Cognitive Psychology","volume":"38 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11617500/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acp.70002","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Forensic facial professionals have been shown in previous studies to identify people from frontal face images more accurately than untrained participants when given 30 s per face pair. We tested whether this superiority holds in more challenging conditions. Two groups of forensic facial professionals (examiners, reviewers) and untrained participants were tested in three lab-based tasks: other-race face identification, disguised face identification, and face memory. For other-race face identification, on same-race faces, examiners were superior to controls; on different-race identification, examiners and controls performed comparably. Examiners were superior to controls for impersonation disguise, but not consistently superior for evasion disguise. Examiners' performance on the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT+) was marginally better than reviewers and controls. We conclude that under laboratory-style conditions, professional examiners' identification superiority does not generalize completely to other-race and disguised faces. Future work should administer other-race and disguise face identification tests that allow forensic professionals to follow methods and procedures they typically use in casework.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Applied Cognitive Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Applied Cognitive Psychology seeks to publish the best papers dealing with psychological analyses of memory, learning, thinking, problem solving, language, and consciousness as they occur in the real world. Applied Cognitive Psychology will publish papers on a wide variety of issues and from diverse theoretical perspectives. The journal focuses on studies of human performance and basic cognitive skills in everyday environments including, but not restricted to, studies of eyewitness memory, autobiographical memory, spatial cognition, skill training, expertise and skilled behaviour. Articles will normally combine realistic investigations of real world events with appropriate theoretical analyses and proper appraisal of practical implications.
期刊最新文献
Adults' Ratings of Youths With Autism Spectrum Disorder When Recalling a Stressful Event Tipsy Testimonies: The Effect of Alcohol Intoxication Status, Crime Role and Juror Characteristics on Mock Jury Decision-Making Eyewitness Decision Processes: A Valid Reflector Variable Lost in the Mall? Interrogating Judgements of False Memory Perceptual Expertise of Forensic Examiners and Reviewers on Tests of Cross-Race and Disguised Face Identification and Face Memory
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1