Literature DB >> 33510971

Associations between self-reported and objective face recognition abilities are only evident in above- and below-average recognisers.

Alejandro J Estudillo1,2, Hoo Keat Wong2.   

Abstract

The 20-Item Prosopagnosia Items (PI-20) was recently introduced as a self-report measure of face recognition abilities and as an instrument to help the diagnosis of prosopagnosia. In general, studies using this questionnaire have shown that observers have moderate to strong insights into their face recognition abilities. However, it remains unknown whether these insights are equivalent for the whole range of face recognition abilities. The present study investigates this issue using the Mandarin version of the PI-20 and the Cambridge Face Memory Test Chinese (CFMT-Chinese). Our results showed a moderate negative association between the PI-20 and the CFMT-Chinese. However, this association was driven by people with low and high face recognition ability, but absent in people within the typical range of face recognition performance. The implications of these results for the study of individual differences and the diagnosis of prosopagnosia are discussed.
© 2021 Estudillo and Wong.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cambridge face memory test; Developmental prosopagnosia; Individual differences in face recognition; Prosopagnosia index; Self-reported face recognition abilities

Year:  2021        PMID: 33510971      PMCID: PMC7808263          DOI: 10.7717/peerj.10629

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PeerJ        ISSN: 2167-8359            Impact factor:   2.984


  32 in total

1.  The Cambridge Face Memory Test: results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants.

Authors:  Brad Duchaine; Ken Nakayama
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2005-09-19       Impact factor: 3.139

2.  People with and without prosopagnosia have insight into their face recognition ability.

Authors:  Lucy Anne Livingston; Punit Shah
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 2.143

3.  Damasio's error - Prosopagnosia with intact within-category object recognition.

Authors:  Bruno Rossion
Journal:  J Neuropsychol       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 2.864

4.  Self-reported face recognition is highly valid, but alone is not highly discriminative of prosopagnosia-level performance on objective assessments.

Authors:  Joseph M Arizpe; Elyana Saad; Ayooluwa O Douglas; Laura Germine; Jeremy B Wilmer; Joseph M DeGutis
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2019-06

5.  The definition and diagnosis of developmental prosopagnosia.

Authors:  Sarah Bate; Jeremy J Tree
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2016-06-20       Impact factor: 2.143

6.  Hereditary prosopagnosia: the first case series.

Authors:  Martina Grueter; Thomas Grueter; Vaughan Bell; Juergen Horst; Wolfgang Laskowski; Karl Sperling; Peter W Halligan; Hadyn D Ellis; Ingo Kennerknecht
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 4.027

7.  Diagnosing prosopagnosia in East Asian individuals: Norms for the Cambridge Face Memory Test-Chinese.

Authors:  Elinor McKone; Lulu Wan; Rachel Robbins; Kate Crookes; Jia Liu
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol       Date:  2017-09-14       Impact factor: 2.468

8.  Do people have insight into their face recognition abilities?

Authors:  Romina Palermo; Bruno Rossion; Gillian Rhodes; Renaud Laguesse; Tolga Tez; Bronwyn Hall; Andrea Albonico; Manuela Malaspina; Roberta Daini; Jessica Irons; Shahd Al-Janabi; Libby C Taylor; Davide Rivolta; Elinor McKone
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 2.143

9.  The 20 item prosopagnosia index (PI20): relationship with the Glasgow face-matching test.

Authors:  Punit Shah; Sophie Sowden; Anne Gaule; Caroline Catmur; Geoffrey Bird
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 2.963

10.  Subjective assessment for super recognition: an evaluation of self-report methods in civilian and police participants.

Authors:  Sarah Bate; Gavin Dudfield
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 2.984

View more
  1 in total

1.  Two face masks are better than one: congruency effects in face matching.

Authors:  Alejandro J Estudillo; Hoo Keat Wong
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2022-06-08
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.