Face averages and multiple images in a live matching task

Abstract

We know from previous research that unfamiliar face matching (determining whether two simultaneously presented images show the same person or not) is very error-prone. A small number of studies in laboratory settings have shown that the use of multiple images or a face average, rather than a single image, can improve face matching performance. Here, we tested 1,999 participants using four-image arrays and face averages in two separate live matching tasks. Matching a single image to a live person resulted in numerous errors (79.9% accuracy across both experiments), and neither multiple images (82.4% accuracy) nor face averages (76.9% accuracy) improved performance. These results are important when considering possible alterations which could be made to photo-ID. Although multiple images and face averages have produced measurable improvements in performance in recent laboratory studies, they do not produce benefits in a real-world live face matching context.

Searching for faces in crowd chokepoint videos

“…It is unclear whether providing multiple images during face matching produces measurable benefits (Ritchie et al, ; White, Burton, et al, ), although evidence suggests that it improves searching for targets in crowds (Mileva & Burton, ). Here, we found that three low (but not high) variability images improved face searching performance over a single image.…”

“…These averages are thought to provide a stable face representation by diluting idiosyncratic aspects of particular instances (Jenkins & Burton, ), therefore providing greater identity information. Although evidence from face matching tasks is mixed with regard to whether averages improve performance (Ritchie et al, , ; White, Burton, et al, ), the potential benefits of their use during crowd searching have yet to be investigated.…”

“…Previous research suggests that providing variability information, through multiple images of an unfamiliar face, may improve both matching (White, Burton, Jenkins, & Kemp, 2014; cf. Ritchie et al, ) and learning (Ritchie & Burton, ) performance, with larger variation across images of the same individual producing increased performance (Menon et al, ; Ritchie & Burton, ). Further, initial evidence suggests that viewing multiple images of a target may also prove beneficial when searching for that person in a crowd (Mileva & Burton, ).…”

“…Importantly, in the majority of cases, these types of matching tasks involve people who are unfamiliar to the viewer. A number of studies have now demonstrated the difficulties associated with both “photo to photo” (e.g., Burton, White, & McNeill, ; Kramer, Mohamed, & Hardy, ; Kramer, Mulgrew, & Reynolds, ; Megreya & Burton, ; Megreya, Sandford, & Burton, ; Ritchie et al, ) and “live person to photo” matching (e.g., Kemp, Towell, & Pike, ; Kramer, Mireku, Flack, & Ritchie, ; Megreya & Burton, ; Ritchie, Mireku, & Kramer, ; White, Kemp, Jenkins, Matheson, & Burton, ).…”

“…Recent evidence suggests that providing multiple images of an unfamiliar face may result in improvements with both matching (White, Burton, Jenkins, & Kemp, ; cf. Ritchie et al, ) and learning (Ritchie & Burton, ). Further, larger variation across images of the same individual appears to produce increased performance in both cases (Menon, White, & Kemp, ; Ritchie & Burton, ).…”