Background: Unfamiliar face processing is an ability that varies considerably between individuals. Numerous studies have aimed to identify its underlying determinants using controlled experimental procedures. While such tests can isolate variables that influence face processing, they usually involve somewhat unrealistic situations and optimized face images as stimulus material. As a consequence, the extent to which the performance observed under laboratory settings is informative for predicting real-life proficiency remains unclear. Results: We present normative data for two ecologically valid but underused tests of face matching: the Yearbook Test (YBT) and the Facial Identity Card Sorting Test (FICST). The YBT (n = 252) measures identity matching across substantial age-related changes in facial appearance, while the FICST (n = 218) assesses the ability to process unfamiliar facial identity despite superficial image variations. To determine the predictive value of both tests, a subsample of our cohort (n = 181) also completed a commonly used test of face recognition and two tests of face perception (the long form of the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT+), the Expertise in Facial Comparison Test (EFCT) and the Person Identification Challenge Test (PICT)). Conclusions: Focusing on the top performers identified independently per test, we made two important observations: 1) YBT and FICST performance can predict CFMT+ scores and vice versa; and 2) EFCT and PICT scores neither reliably predict superior performance in ecologically meaningful and challenging tests of face matching, nor in the most commonly used test of face recognition. These findings emphasize the necessity for using challenging and ecologically relevant, and thus highly sensitive, tasks of unfamiliar face processing to identify high-performing individuals in the normal population.

Recent investigations of individual differences have demonstrated striking variability in performance both within the same subprocess in face cognition (e.g. face perception), but also between two different subprocesses (i.e. face perception versus face recognition ) that are assessed using different tasks (face matching versus face memory ). Such differences between and within individuals between and within laboratory tests raise practical challenges. This applies in particular to the development of screening tests for the selection of personnel in real-world settings where faces are routinely processed, such as at passport control. The aim of this study, therefore, was to examine the performance profiles of individuals within and across two different subprocesses of face cognition: face perception and face recognition. To this end, 146 individuals completed four different tests of face matching—one novel tool for assessing proficiency in face perception, as well as three established measures—and two benchmark tests of face memory probing face recognition. In addition to correlational analyses, we further scrutinized individual performance profiles of the highest and lowest performing observers identified per test , as well as across all tests . Overall, a number of correlations emerged between tests. However, there was limited evidence at the individual level to suggest that high proficiency in one test generalized to other tests measuring the same subprocess, as well as those that measured a different subprocess. Beyond emphasizing the need to honour inter-individual differences through careful multivariate assessment in the laboratory, our findings have real-world implications: combinations of tests that most accurately map the task(s) and processes of interest are required for personnel selection.

No abstract

How do humans process unfamiliar faces, and how can we reliably identify individuals that are most proficient at it? Motivated by its relevance in applied contexts, much empirical work has sought to answer these questions. Controlled laboratory tests have been developed to understand the contribution of different variables and inter-individual differences. However, such face processing tests involving stimuli derived from ideal conditions, or manipulations and tasks that are not representative of real life, may lack ecological validity. This crucial consideration is often overlooked when laboratory tests are used to predict real-life proficiency. The present study followed the rationale that traditionally used controlled tests should be paired with more realistic, and ecologically meaningful ones – in terms of the stimuli and tasks performed. Testing large and heterogenous samples, we standardized two underused tests of facial identity matching: the Yearbook Test (YBT; Bruck et al., 1991) and the Face Identity Card Sorting Test (FICST; Jenkins et al., 2011). These procedurally simple tests mimic real-life challenges in face perception, as they assess unfamiliar facial identity matching across superficial image changes, or substantial age-related change in appearance. Beyond providing normative data, we describe how performance measured by these tests relates to that observed on more commonly used tests of face recognition (CFMT+; Russell et al., 2009) and perception (EFCT; PICT; White et al., 2015). Our findings suggest that (i) the YBT and FICST are easy-to-use, preferable alternatives to pairwise face matching tasks, which are prone to speed-accuracy trade-offs; (ii) challenging and ecologically valid tests should complement highly controlled measures when aiming to identify individuals with superior face processing abilities for real-life purposes.

Eye movements provide a functional signature of how human vision is achieved. Many recent studies have consistently reported robust idiosyncratic visual sampling strategies during face recognition. Whether these interindividual differences are mirrored by idiosyncratic neural responses remains unknown. To this aim, we first tracked eye movements of male and female observers during face recognition. Additionally, for every observer we obtained an objective index of neural face discrimination through EEG that was recorded while they fixated different facial information. We found that foveation of facial features fixated longer during face recognition elicited stronger neural face discrimination responses across all observers. This relationship occurred independently of interindividual differences in preferential facial information sampling (e.g., eye vs mouth lookers), and started as early as the first fixation. Our data show that eye movements play a functional role during face processing by providing the neural system with the information that is diagnostic to a specific observer. The effective processing of identity involves idiosyncratic, rather than universal face representations.