Literature DB >> 20192132

Revisiting the processing of internal and external features of unfamiliar faces: the headscarf effect.

Ahmed M Megreya1, Markus Bindemann.   

Abstract

Five experiments are reported in which the relative importance of internal and external features for unfamiliar face identification are examined by a matching task. In experiments 1-3, Egyptian adults showed a robust internal-feature advantage for matching photographs of Egyptian faces. In experiment 4, a cross-cultural comparison between the ability of Egyptian and British adults to match the internal and external features of unfamiliar Egyptian and British faces was made. Once again, Egyptians showed an internal-feature advantage, for all faces. In contrast, British observers and also Egyptian children in experiment 5--showed external-feature advantages consistent with previous research. We attribute this contrast to the long-term experience of Egyptians in perceiving and recognising faces with headscarves, which might develop more expertise in processing the internal than the external features of unfamiliar faces.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20192132     DOI: 10.1068/p6385

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  12 in total

1.  Infrequent identity mismatches are frequently undetected.

Authors:  Megan H Papesh; Stephen D Goldinger
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Geometric distortions affect face recognition in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and monkeys (Macaca mulatta).

Authors:  Jessica Taubert; Lisa A Parr
Journal:  Anim Cogn       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 3.084

3.  The significance of hair for face recognition.

Authors:  Umar Toseeb; David R T Keeble; Eleanor J Bryant
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-26       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  The utility of multiple synthesized views in the recognition of unfamiliar faces.

Authors:  Scott P Jones; Dominic M Dwyer; Michael B Lewis
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 2.143

5.  Do intoxicated witnesses produce poor facial composite images?

Authors:  S J Bayless; A J Harvey; W Kneller; C D Frowd
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 4.530

6.  The Muslim headscarf and face perception: "they all look the same, don't they?".

Authors:  Umar Toseeb; Eleanor J Bryant; David R T Keeble
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Factors affecting the identification of individual mountain bongo antelope.

Authors:  Gwili E M Gibbon; Markus Bindemann; David L Roberts
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Feature instructions improve face-matching accuracy.

Authors:  Ahmed M Megreya; Markus Bindemann
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-03-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  The Own-Race Bias for Face Recognition in a Multiracial Society.

Authors:  Hoo Keat Wong; Ian D Stephen; David R T Keeble
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-03-06

10.  Surgical face masks impair human face matching performance for familiar and unfamiliar faces.

Authors:  Daniel J Carragher; Peter J B Hancock
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2020-11-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.