Abstract
Despite many years of research, there has been surprisingly little progress in our understanding of how faces are identified. Here I argue that there are two contributory factors: (a) Our methods have obscured a critical aspect of the problem, within-person variability; and (b) research has tended to conflate familiar and unfamiliar face processing. Examples of procedures for studying variability are given, and a case is made for studying real faces, of the type people recognize every day. I argue that face recognition (specifically identification) may only be understood by adopting new techniques that acknowledge statistical patterns in the visual environment. As a consequence, some of our current methods will need to be abandoned.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1467-1485 |
| Number of pages | 19 |
| Journal | Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology |
| Volume | 66 |
| Issue number | 8 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Aug 2013 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Why has research in face recognition progressed so slowly? The importance of variability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver