For unfamiliar faces, deciding whether two photographs depict the same person or not can be difficult. One way to substantially improve accuracy is to defer to the 'wisdom of crowds' by aggregating responses across multiple individuals. However, there are several methods available for doing this. Here, we investigated performance in three tests of unfamiliar face matching. In all cases, we found that going with the option chosen by the majority of people provided the best approach. No benefit was found by weighting an option's popularity using average confidence, while choosing the 'surprisingly popular' option resulted in a sizeable decrease in accuracy. Therefore, rather than incorporating metacognitive judgements, we endorse a simple majority vote for this particular task.

Palacký University Olomouc Czech Republic

University of Lincoln UK

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Bobak A. K., Hancock P. J., Bate S. (2016). Super-recognisers in action: Evidence from face-matching and face memory tasks. Applied Cognitive Psychology PubMed DOI PMC

Burton A. M. (2013). Why has research in face recognition progressed so slowly? The importance of variability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology PubMed DOI

Burton A. M., Kramer R. S. S., Ritchie K. L., Jenkins R. (2016). Identity from variation: Representations of faces derived from multiple instances. Cognitive Science PubMed DOI

Burton A. M., White D., McNeill A. (2010). The Glasgow face matching test. Behavior Research Methods PubMed DOI

Dowsett A. J., Burton A. M. (2015). Unfamiliar face matching: Pairs out-perform individuals and provide a route to training. British Journal of Psychology PubMed DOI

Fysh M. C., Bindemann M. (2018). The kent face matching test. British Journal of Psychology PubMed DOI

Galton F. (1907). Vox Populi. Nature DOI

Jeckeln G., Hahn C. A., Noyes E., Cavazos J. G., O’Toole A. J. (2018). Wisdom of the social versus non-social crowd in face identification. British Journal of Psychology PubMed DOI

Juni M. Z., Eckstein M. P. (2017). The wisdom of crowds for visual search. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences PubMed PMC

Kramer R. S. S., Cartledge C. (2024). Crowds improve human detection of AI-synthesised faces. Applied Cognitive Psychology DOI

Kramer R. S. S., McIntosh R. D. (2024). Face matching and self-insight: A Registered Report investigating individual differences in metacognitive sensitivity, efficiency, and bias. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Advance online publication. PubMed PMC

Kramer R. S. S., Gous G., Mireku M. O., Ward R. (2022). Metacognition during unfamiliar face matching. British Journal of Psychology PubMed DOI

Prelec D., Seung H. S., McCoy J. (2017). A solution to the single-question crowd wisdom problem. Nature PubMed DOI

Rutchick A. M., Ross B. J., Calvillo D. P., Mesick C. C. (2020). Does the “surprisingly popular” method yield accurate crowdsourced predictions? Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications PubMed DOI PMC

Saha Roy T., Mazumder S., Das K. (2021). Wisdom of crowds benefits perceptual decision making across difficulty levels. Scientific Reports PubMed DOI PMC

Towler A., Kemp R. I., Burton A. M., Dunn J. D., Wayne T., Moreton R., White D. (2019). Do professional facial image comparison training courses work? PLOS ONE PubMed DOI PMC

White D., Burton A. M., Kemp R. I., Jenkins R. O. B. (2013). Crowd effects in unfamiliar face matching. Applied Cognitive Psychology DOI

White D., Kemp R. I., Jenkins R., Matheson M., Burton A. M. (2014). Passport officers’ errors in face matching. PLOS ONE PubMed DOI PMC