Sex differences in unfamiliar face identification: Evidence from matching tasks

Megreya, Ahmed M.; Bindemann, Markus; Havard, Catriona

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.03.003

Cited by 69 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although previous studies investigating sex differences in face processing have reported mixed results, they largely point to a female superiority (Megreya et al, 2011;Sommer et al, 2013). The observed sex differences for the Mooney test thus could reflect other, non-face-perception processes that might be at play.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…It is curious, for example, that males outperform females on the Mooney test (Foreman, 1991;Verhallen et al, 2014), whereas, if a sex difference is observed in other tests of face processing, it is in favor of females (Megreya, Bindemann, & Havard, 2011). Moreover, we have found (Verhallen et al, in preparation) that performance on a three-alternative forced-choice (3AFC) version of the original Mooney test does not correlate very strongly (Spearman's ρ = .21) with performance on a test of face discrimination (the Glasgow Face Matching Test; Burton, White, & McNeill, 2010), and correlates only modestly (Spearman's ρ = .31) with performance on a test of face recognition (the Cambridge Face Memory Test; Duchaine & Nakayama, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It remains unclear to what extent the Mooney test taps face recognition ability (see above); nevertheless, we limited ourselves to Caucasian faces in the development of our test, although our participant sample was not confined to Caucasians. Since the female advantage in face-processing studies tends to be restricted to female faces (Megreya et al, 2011;Rehnman & Herlitz, 2007;Sommer, Hildebrandt, Kunina-Habenicht, Schacht, & Wilhelm, 2013), we included equal numbers of female and male face stimuli in our test.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A new Mooney test

Mollon

2015

Behav Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since its introduction in 1957, the Mooney test has continued to see active use in studies of visual perception, in studies using brain imaging, and in clinical research. Mooney's original version is of limited length, however, and was designed to be administered by time-consuming personal interview. We have developed a new, extended version of the Mooney test that is suitable for online testing and for use in a test-retest paradigm. The Mooney-Verhallen Test (MVT) comprises 144 trials, takes on average less than 10 min to complete, and has a Spearman-Brown-corrected test-retest reliability of ρ = .89. We outline our methods for developing the stimuli and for selecting the final stimulus set, and we present the results from two rounds of testing on two independent samples of 374 participants and 505 participants, respectively. The test is freely available for scientific use.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A new Mooney test

Mollon

2015

Behav Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We should first note that our task was designed to measure people's tendency to rely on summary representations in face processing, rather than face recognition per se, and, as such, was different from the tasks used in previous work on the own-gender bias, such as tasks for face recognition memory (e.g., Cross et al, 1971) or simultaneous face-matching tasks (e.g., Megreya, Bindemann, & Havard, 2011). Apart from methodological factors, what could explain the greater averaging for owngender faces?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Greater visual averaging of face identity for own-gender faces

Fockert

Gautrey

2013

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent evidence suggests that observers can rapidly form an average representation based on a set of simultaneously presented faces. Here, we replicate this finding and show that the tendency to process sets of faces in terms of an average representation is greater for own-gender faces. Male and female participants viewed sets of four male or female faces before deciding whether or not a subsequently presented single test face had been present in the set. Incorrect endorsement that it was one of the set members was greater when the test face was a morphed average of the four faces than when it was an actual set member, and this effect was strongest when the gender of the faces was the same as the observer's. The finding that observers were more likely to incorrectly endorse own-gender (vs. othergender) faces forms an exception to the often reported owngender advantage in face recognition.

show abstract

“…Some studies showed that females perform better than males at face processing tasks (e.g., Bowles et al, 2009;Heisz, Pottruff, & Shore, 2013;McBain, Norton, & Chen, 2009;Megreya, Bindemann, & Havard, 2011;Rehnman & Herlitz 2007;Sommer, Hildebrandt, Kunina-Habenicht, Schacht, & Wilhelm, 2013), although this female advantage was not found in all studies, in particular in the original report of the BFRT (Benton & Van Allen, 1968). This advantage is also observed sometimes only in specific conditions (see Weirich, Hoffmann, Meißner, Heinz, & Bengner, 2011), could be specific for female faces (the so-called "female own-sex bias"; see e.g., Lewin & Herlitz, 2002;Lovén, Herlitz, & Rehnman, 2011;McKelvie, Standing, St Jean, & Law, 1993;Megreya et al, 2011) with a reversed effect occasionally reported for male faces (male observers better than female observers; see e.g., McKelvie et al, 1993).…”

Section: Sex Differencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative data for accuracy and response times at the computerized Benton Facial Recognition Test (BFRT-c)

Rossion¹,

Michel²

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report normative data from a large (N=307) sample of young adult participants tested with a computerized version of the long form of the classical Benton Facial Recognition Test (BFRT; Benton & Van Allen, 1968). The BFRT-c requires to match a target face photograph to one or three of 6 face photographs simultaneously presented. Percent accuracy at the BFRT-c (81%-83%) is below ceiling yet well above chance level, with little interindividual variance in this typical population sample, as expected from a sensitive clinical test. While split-half reliability on accuracy rates is relatively low due to the large variability in difficulty across items, correct response times (RTs) measured in this version – completed in 3 minutes on average - provide a reliable and critical complementary measure of performance at individual unfamiliar face matching. In line with previous observations from other measures, females outperform male participants at the BFRT-c, especially for female faces. In general, performance is also lower following lighting changes than head rotations, in line with previous studies emphasizing limited ability at matching pictures of unfamiliar faces with important variations in lighting direction. Overall, this normative data set supports the validity of the BFRT-c as a key component of a battery of tests identifying clinical impairments at individual face recognition such as observed in acquired prosopagnosia. However, beyond global indexes of performance based on accuracy rates only, this analysis strongly recommends full consideration of the time taken to match individual faces as well as the variability in performance across items.

show abstract

Sex differences in unfamiliar face identification: Evidence from matching tasks

Cited by 69 publications

References 37 publications

A new Mooney test

A new Mooney test

Greater visual averaging of face identity for own-gender faces

Normative data for accuracy and response times at the computerized Benton Facial Recognition Test (BFRT-c)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About