Forensic facial examiners vs. super-recognizers: Evaluating behavior beyond accuracy

Abstract

Forensic facial examiners and super-recognizers are highly accurate at comparing two faces to determine identity and outperform the general population. Typically, forensic facial examiners are highly trained, whereas super-recognizers are thought to rely on natural ability. Previous studies have compared the accuracy of facial examiners and super-recognizers but have not studied the detailed behavioral properties of their face matching performance. In this study, we further analyzed data from a previous study which tested facial examiners and super-recognizers on a challenging test of face matching, or facial comparison, ability. In that study, the two groups were equally accurate. Here, we further characterize their behavior. We found distinct behaviors between these two groups, independent of overall accuracy. For differences, we found: 1) Facial examiners took advantage of the full range of the 7-point identity judgment scale; super-recognizers had a preference for the extreme ends of the scale (highly confident decisions); 2) For facial examiners, identity judgments for same-identities and different-identities mirrored each other; those from super-recognizers did not; 3) We evaluated identity judgment agreement across participants. Facial examiners agreed with each other to a greater extent than super-recognizers. We next examined metacognitive awareness of their own ability. While there were qualitative differences in the use of the scale, both groups showed behavioral insight into their own accuracy: more confident people and those who rated the task to be easier tended to be more accurate. These findings suggest that studying facial comparisons may benefit from assessing more than accuracy. This deeper understanding allows us to better interpret judgments according to the nature of a person's facial expertise and experience.

Finding a Broadly Practical Approach for Regulating the Use of Facial Recognition by Law Enforcement

“…Super recognizers have tested as high as 95 percent on some FR tests (Phillips et al, 2018, but there are concerns about whether this testing translates to real-world performance (Ramon, Bobak, and White, 2019). Some of research in this area notes the importance of confidence judgments in assessing the quality of the positive identification and finds that facial examiners are more consistent as a group, suggesting the importance of training and experience (Hahn et al, 2021). Moreover, there remains evidence of crossrace bias effects for super recognizers, just like the general population (Bate et al, 2019).…”