Experts on age estimation

Abstract

The aim of this investigation was to study the biases and accuracy in age estimation of persons selling alcohol. Two experiments are reported, both suggesting that the accuracy in age estimation of Swedish alcohol salespersons is higher than that of control persons. This expertise in age estimation is probably the result of the extensive training Swedish alcohol salespersons go through as a natural part of their profession. Nonetheless, their estimates were not free from bias. Salespersons overestimated the age of target persons below 20 years of age and thus too young to buy alcohol. The results also revealed that controls, in contrast to salespersons, assimilated their estimates towards their own age (i.e. an own-anchor effect). Furthermore, female participants were shown to estimate the age of old target persons (56-65 years) more accurately than male participants. These results are discussed in relation to previous findings on training in age estimation and present jurisdiction.

Age Estimation from Faces and Voices: A Review

“…Consistent with most of researches on voices, no difference between male and female participants was reported in age estimation from faces (Dehon & Brédart, 2001;Voelkle et al, 2012). Moreover, as for voices, when a gender difference was reported, females estimated the age more accurately than males (Nkengne et al, 2008;Vestlund et al, 2009). Similarly, Vestlund et al (2009) found that females are less biased than males and more accurate but only with faces from 56 to 65 years.…”

“…Moreover, as for voices, when a gender difference was reported, females estimated the age more accurately than males (Nkengne et al, 2008;Vestlund et al, 2009). Similarly, Vestlund et al (2009) found that females are less biased than males and more accurate but only with faces from 56 to 65 years. Nkengne et al (2008) also provided some support for a better performance in women.…”

“…First, there is a tendency to place the stimuli in the middle range with the age of young stimuli being overestimated and the age of older stimuli being underestimated (e.g., for face: Vestlund et al, 2009;for voice: Cerrato et al, 2000;Ryan & Capadano, 1978;Schötz, 2005;Shipp & Hollien, 1969). This pattern of response could correspond to some sort of central tendency effect (Hollingworth, 1910).…”

“…The most common task used to examine age estimation from both faces and voices is to assign a precise age to voices (e.g., Amilon, Van de Weijer & Schötz, 2007;Hartman, 1979;Huntley, Hollien & Shipp, 1987;Krauss, Freyberg & Morsella, 2002;Moyse, Beaufort, & Brédart, 2014;Schötz, 2005) or the face (e.g., Moyse, & Brédart, 2012;Sörqvist & Eriksson, 2007;Vestlund, Langeborg, Sörqvist, & Eriksson, 2009;Voelkle, Ebner, Lindenberger, & Riediger, 2012;Willner & Rowe, 2001). However, the dependent variables differed according to the studies and lead to different conclusions.…”

“…Nowadays, two complementary dependent measures are mainly used in age estimation from faces, namely signed value and absolute value (e.g., Dehon & Brédart, 2001;Moyse & Brédart, 2012;Vestlund et al, 2009;Voelkle et al, 2012). The first one corresponds to the mean value of the difference between perceived age and chronological age for a given set of stimuli.…”