Variability in photos of the same face

Rob Jenkins, David White, Xandra Van Montfort, A. Mike Burton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

214 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Psychological studies of face recognition have typically ignored within-person variation in appearance, instead emphasising differences between individuals. Studies typically assume that a photograph adequately captures a person's appearance, and for that reason most studies use just one, or a small number of photos per person. Here we show that photographs are not consistent indicators of facial appearance because they are blind to within-person variability. Crucially, this within-person variability is often very large compared to the differences between people. To investigate variability in photos of the same face, we collected images from the internet to sample a realistic range for each individual. In Experiments 1 and 2, unfamiliar viewers perceived images of the same person as being different individuals, while familiar viewers perfectly identified the same photos. In Experiment 3, multiple photographs of any individual formed a continuum of good to bad likeness, which was highly sensitive to familiarity. Finally, in Experiment 4, we found that within-person variability exceeded between-person variability in attractiveness. These observations are critical to our understanding of face processing, because they suggest that a key component of face processing has been ignored. As well as its theoretical significance, this scale of variability has important practical implications. For example, our findings suggest that face photographs are unsuitable as proof of identity. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)313-323
Number of pages11
JournalCognition
Volume121
Issue number3
Early online date3 Sep 2011
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2011

Keywords

  • face perception
  • identity
  • photography
  • face recognition
  • attractiveness
  • facial attractivness
  • unfamiliar faces
  • evolutionary psychology
  • physical attractiveness
  • matching task
  • recognition
  • memory
  • familiarity
  • representations
  • exposure

Cite this

Jenkins, R., White, D., Van Montfort, X., & Burton, A. M. (2011). Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition, 121(3), 313-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001

Variability in photos of the same face. / Jenkins, Rob; White, David; Van Montfort, Xandra; Burton, A. Mike.

In: Cognition, Vol. 121, No. 3, 12.2011, p. 313-323.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jenkins, R, White, D, Van Montfort, X & Burton, AM 2011, 'Variability in photos of the same face' Cognition, vol. 121, no. 3, pp. 313-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001
Jenkins R, White D, Van Montfort X, Burton AM. Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition. 2011 Dec;121(3):313-323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001
Jenkins, Rob ; White, David ; Van Montfort, Xandra ; Burton, A. Mike. / Variability in photos of the same face. In: Cognition. 2011 ; Vol. 121, No. 3. pp. 313-323.
@article{1f6beafb098b45019d9b4d2179942559,
title = "Variability in photos of the same face",
abstract = "Psychological studies of face recognition have typically ignored within-person variation in appearance, instead emphasising differences between individuals. Studies typically assume that a photograph adequately captures a person's appearance, and for that reason most studies use just one, or a small number of photos per person. Here we show that photographs are not consistent indicators of facial appearance because they are blind to within-person variability. Crucially, this within-person variability is often very large compared to the differences between people. To investigate variability in photos of the same face, we collected images from the internet to sample a realistic range for each individual. In Experiments 1 and 2, unfamiliar viewers perceived images of the same person as being different individuals, while familiar viewers perfectly identified the same photos. In Experiment 3, multiple photographs of any individual formed a continuum of good to bad likeness, which was highly sensitive to familiarity. Finally, in Experiment 4, we found that within-person variability exceeded between-person variability in attractiveness. These observations are critical to our understanding of face processing, because they suggest that a key component of face processing has been ignored. As well as its theoretical significance, this scale of variability has important practical implications. For example, our findings suggest that face photographs are unsuitable as proof of identity. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.",
keywords = "face perception, identity, photography, face recognition, attractiveness, facial attractivness, unfamiliar faces, evolutionary psychology, physical attractiveness, matching task, recognition, memory, familiarity, representations, exposure",
author = "Rob Jenkins and David White and {Van Montfort}, Xandra and Burton, {A. Mike}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001",
language = "English",
volume = "121",
pages = "313--323",
journal = "Cognition",
issn = "0010-0277",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Variability in photos of the same face

AU - Jenkins, Rob

AU - White, David

AU - Van Montfort, Xandra

AU - Burton, A. Mike

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - Psychological studies of face recognition have typically ignored within-person variation in appearance, instead emphasising differences between individuals. Studies typically assume that a photograph adequately captures a person's appearance, and for that reason most studies use just one, or a small number of photos per person. Here we show that photographs are not consistent indicators of facial appearance because they are blind to within-person variability. Crucially, this within-person variability is often very large compared to the differences between people. To investigate variability in photos of the same face, we collected images from the internet to sample a realistic range for each individual. In Experiments 1 and 2, unfamiliar viewers perceived images of the same person as being different individuals, while familiar viewers perfectly identified the same photos. In Experiment 3, multiple photographs of any individual formed a continuum of good to bad likeness, which was highly sensitive to familiarity. Finally, in Experiment 4, we found that within-person variability exceeded between-person variability in attractiveness. These observations are critical to our understanding of face processing, because they suggest that a key component of face processing has been ignored. As well as its theoretical significance, this scale of variability has important practical implications. For example, our findings suggest that face photographs are unsuitable as proof of identity. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

AB - Psychological studies of face recognition have typically ignored within-person variation in appearance, instead emphasising differences between individuals. Studies typically assume that a photograph adequately captures a person's appearance, and for that reason most studies use just one, or a small number of photos per person. Here we show that photographs are not consistent indicators of facial appearance because they are blind to within-person variability. Crucially, this within-person variability is often very large compared to the differences between people. To investigate variability in photos of the same face, we collected images from the internet to sample a realistic range for each individual. In Experiments 1 and 2, unfamiliar viewers perceived images of the same person as being different individuals, while familiar viewers perfectly identified the same photos. In Experiment 3, multiple photographs of any individual formed a continuum of good to bad likeness, which was highly sensitive to familiarity. Finally, in Experiment 4, we found that within-person variability exceeded between-person variability in attractiveness. These observations are critical to our understanding of face processing, because they suggest that a key component of face processing has been ignored. As well as its theoretical significance, this scale of variability has important practical implications. For example, our findings suggest that face photographs are unsuitable as proof of identity. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

KW - face perception

KW - identity

KW - photography

KW - face recognition

KW - attractiveness

KW - facial attractivness

KW - unfamiliar faces

KW - evolutionary psychology

KW - physical attractiveness

KW - matching task

KW - recognition

KW - memory

KW - familiarity

KW - representations

KW - exposure

U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001

DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001

M3 - Article

VL - 121

SP - 313

EP - 323

JO - Cognition

JF - Cognition

SN - 0010-0277

IS - 3

ER -