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

PeerJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. e10629
Author(s):  
Alejandro J. Estudillo ◽  
Hoo Keat Wong
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Negative Association ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Recognition Ability ◽  
General Studies ◽  
Typical Range ◽  
Report Measure

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.

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

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Estudillo ◽  
Wong Hoo Keat
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Negative Association ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Recognition Ability ◽  
General Studies ◽  
Typical Range ◽  
Report Measure

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.

scholarly journals Robust associations between the 20-item prosopagnosia index and the Cambridge Face Memory Test in the general population

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 160923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie L. H. Gray ◽  
Geoffrey Bird ◽  
Richard Cook
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
General Population ◽  
Validation Study ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
Formal Testing ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Report Measure

Developmental prosopagnosia (DP) is a neurodevelopmental condition, characterized by lifelong face recognition deficits. Leading research groups diagnose the condition using complementary computer-based tasks and self-report measures. In an attempt to standardize the reporting of self-report evidence, we recently developed the 20-item prosopagnosia index (PI20), a short questionnaire measure of prosopagnosic traits suitable for screening adult samples for DP. Strong correlations between scores on the PI20 and performance on the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) appeared to confirm that individuals possess sufficient insight into their face recognition ability to complete a self-report measure of prosopagnosic traits. However, the extent to which people have insight into their face recognition abilities remains contentious. A lingering concern is that feedback from formal testing, received prior to administration of the PI20, may have augmented the self-insight of some respondents in the original validation study. To determine whether the significant correlation with the CFMT was an artefact of previously delivered feedback, we sought to replicate the validation study in individuals with no history of formal testing. We report highly significant correlations in two independent samples drawn from the general population, confirming: (i) that a significant relationship exists between PI20 scores and performance on the CFMT, and (ii) that this is not dependent on the inclusion of individuals who have previously received feedback. These findings support the view that people have sufficient insight into their face recognition abilities to complete a self-report measure of prosopagnosic traits.

scholarly journals The Twenty Item Prosopagnosia Index (PI20) provides meaningful evidence of face recognition impairment

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Tsantani ◽  
Tim Vestner ◽  
Richard Cook
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Recognition Accuracy ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Objective Measures ◽  
Recognition Ability ◽  
Considerable Debate ◽  
Computer Based ◽  
Typical Range ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Intended Use

The Twenty Item Prosopagnosia Index (PI20) is a self-report questionnaire used for quantifying prosopagnosic traits. This scale is intended to help researchers identify cases of developmental prosopagnosia by providing standardized self-report evidence to complement diagnostic evidence obtained from objective computer-based tasks. In order to respond appropriately to items, prosopagnosics must have some insight that their face recognition is well below average, while non-prosopagnosics need to understand that their relative face recognition ability falls within the typical range. There has been considerable debate about whether participants have the necessary insight into their face recognition abilities to respond appropriately. In the present study, we sought to determine whether the PI20 provides meaningful evidence of face recognition impairment. In keeping with the intended use of the instrument, we used PI20 scores to identify two groups: high-PI20 scorers (those with self-reported face recognition difficulties) and low-PI20 scorers (those with no self-reported face recognition difficulties). We found that participant groups distinguished on the basis of PI20 scores clearly differed in terms of their mean performance on objective measures of face recognition ability. We also found that high-PI20 scorers were more likely to achieve levels of face recognition accuracy associated with developmental prosopagnosia.

scholarly journals Facing the facts: Naive participants have only moderate insight into their face recognition and face perception abilities

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 872-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna K Bobak ◽  
Viktoria R Mileva ◽  
Peter JB Hancock
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Valuable Contribution ◽  
Object Processing ◽  
Recognition Ability ◽  
Large Populations ◽  
With Memory ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Report Measure

A reliable self-report measure to assess the broad spectrum of face recognition ability (FRA) from developmental prosopagnosia (DP) to super-recognition would make a valuable contribution to initial screening of large populations. We examined the performance of 96 naive participants and seven super-recognisers (SRs) using a range of face and object processing tasks and a newly developed 20-item questionnaire, the Stirling Face Recognition Scale (SFRS). Overall, our findings suggest that young adults have only moderate insight into their FRA, but those who have been previously informed of their (exceptional) performance, the SRs, estimate their FRA accurately. Principal component analysis of SFRS yielded two components. One loads on questions about low ability and correlates with perceptual tasks, and one loads on questions about high FRA and correlates with memory for faces. We recommend that self-report measures of FRA should be used in addition to behavioural testing, to allow for cross-study comparisons, until new, more reliable instruments of self-report are developed. However, self-report measures should not be solely relied upon to identify highly skilled individuals. Implications of these results for theory and applied practice are discussed.

scholarly journals Intrinsic equivalence between developmental prosopagnosia questionnaires

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daisuke Matsuyoshi ◽  
Katsumi Watanabe
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
High Reliability ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Large Population ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Effective Measure ◽  
Recognition Ability ◽  
Relationship Of

AbstractThe 20-item prosopagnosia index (PI20) is a self-report measure of face recognition ability, which is aimed to assess the risk for developmental prosopagnosia (DP), developed by Shah, Gaule, Sowden, Bird, and Cook (2015). Although they validated PI20 in several ways and it may serve as a quick and cost-effective measure for estimating DP risk (Livingston & Shah, in press; Shah et al., 2015), they did not formally evaluate its validity against a pre-existing alternative questionnaire (Kennerknecht et al., 2008) even though they criticized the weak relationship of the pre-existing questionnaire to actual behavioral face recognition performance. Thus, we administered the questionnaires to a large population (N = 855) and found a very strong correlation (r = 0.82 [95% confidence interval: 0.80, 0.84]), a principal component that accounted for more than 90% of the variance, and comparable reliability between the questionnaires. These results show unidimensionality and equivalence between the two questionnaires, or at least, a very strong common latent factor underlying them. The PI20 may not be greater than the pre-existing questionnaire; the two questionnaires measured essentially the same trait. The intrinsic equivalence between the questionnaires necessitates a revision of the view that the PI20 overcomes the weakness of the pre-existing questionnaire. Because both questionnaires contained unreliable items, we suggest, instead of using either questionnaire alone, that selection of a set of items with high reliability may offer a more robust approach to capture face recognition ability.

Assessing Individual Differences in Working Models of Caregiving

2007 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 227-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abira Reizer ◽  
Mario Mikulincer
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Parenting Attitudes ◽  
Working Models ◽  
Current Series ◽  
Self Construal ◽  
Communal Orientation ◽  
Attachment Dimensions ◽  
Report Measure

Abstract. In the current series of studies, we developed a self-report measure of mental representations of caregiving (MRC). Study 1 (N = 841) describes the development and factor structure of the MRC scale. Studies 2-4 provided convergent, discriminant, and construct validity of the MRC scale, by examining its associations with attachment dimensions, empathy, emotional control, relational interdependent self-construal, communal orientation, and value priorities. Study 5 revealed significant associations between caregiving representations and parenting attitudes (desire to have a child, feelings toward parenthood, and expectations of self-efficacy as a parent). Overall, the results provide highly consistent evidence for the reliability and validity of the new MRC scale. The implications of individual differences in mental representation of caregiving for prosocial behavior and helping are discussed.

The Effect of Implicit Racial Bias on Recognition of Other-Race Faces

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tobiasz Trawinski ◽  
Araz Aslanian ◽  
Olivia S. Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Racial Bias ◽  
Recognition Performance ◽  
Implicit Bias ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
The Other ◽  
Extensive Experience ◽  
Ability Test ◽  
Implicit Racial Bias ◽  
Recognition Ability

Previous research has established a possible link between recognition performance, individuation experience, and implicit racial bias of other-race faces. However, it remains unclear how implicit racial bias might influence other-race face processing in observers with relatively extensive experience with the other race. Here we examined how recognition of other-race faces might be modulated by observers’ implicit racial bias, in addition to the effects of experience and face recognition ability. Caucasian participants in a culturally diverse city completed a memory task for Asian and Caucasian faces, an implicit association test, an experience questionnaire towards Asians and Caucasians, and a face recognition ability test. Overall, participants showed significantly better recognition performance for other- than own-race faces. More importantly, recognition performance for other-race faces was positively predicted by increased face recognition ability, experience with Asians, and negatively predicted by increased positive bias towards Asians, which was modulated by an interaction between face recognition ability and implicit bias, with the effect of implicit bias observed predominantly in observers with high face recognition ability. Moreover, significant differences were observed among the positions of the first two fixations when participants learned the other-race faces, with the first fixation modulated by the effect of experience and the second fixation modulated by the interaction between implicit bias and face recognition ability. Taken together, these findings suggest the complexity in understanding the perceptual and socio-cognitive influences on the other-race effect, and that observers with high face recognition ability may more likely evaluate racial features involuntarily when recognizing other-race faces.

scholarly journals Feature Specific Attention and Return of Fear after Extinction

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom J. Barry ◽  
Bram Vervliet ◽  
Dirk Hermans
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Attentional Control ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Common Condition ◽  
Similar Stimulus ◽  
Return Of Fear ◽  
The Common ◽  
Fear Potentiated Startle ◽  
Report Measure ◽  
Unique Condition

Anxiety disorders are often treated by repeatedly presenting stimuli that are perceptually similar to original stimuli to which fear was originally acquired. Fear can return after it is extinguished because of the differences between these stimuli. It may possible to attenuate return of fear by manipulating attention to the commonalities between feared stimuli and extinction stimuli. After acquiring fear for an animal-like stimulus by pairing with an electro-cutaneous shock, fear was extinguished by repeatedly presenting a similar stimulus. During extinction participants were asked questions that instructed them to attend towards the features in common between the acquisition and extinction stimulus or towards the unique features of the extinction stimulus. Return of fear was assessed by presenting a second perceptually similar stimulus after extinction. Participants showed a return in skin conductance responding after extinction in the unique condition, and not in the common condition. Both groups showed a return in self-report ratings of US expectancy. Neither group showed a return in fear potentiated startle, but there was evidence that this may have been due to individual differences in emotional attentional control. Our conclusions are limited by the use of a self-report measure of emotional attentional control and the absence of limits on the length of time participants could take to answer the extinction questions. It may be possible to enhance extinction and prevent a return of the physiological aspects of fear by manipulating attention during extinction. However, this does not appear to influence explicit expectancy of aversive outcomes. Individual differences in attentional control may influence this process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document