The effects of acute alcohol intoxication on the cognitive mechanisms underlying false facial recognition

Abstract

RationaleFalse face recognition rates are sometimes higher when faces are learned while under the influence of alcohol. Alcohol myopia theory (AMT) proposes that acute alcohol intoxication during face learning causes people to attend to only the most salient features of a face, impairing the encoding of less salient facial features. Yet, there is currently no direct evidence to support this claim.ObjectivesOur objective was to test whether acute alcohol intoxication impairs face learning by causing subjects to attend to a salient (i.e., distinctive) facial feature over other facial features, as per AMT.MethodsWe employed a balanced placebo design (N = 100). Subjects in the alcohol group were dosed to achieve a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.06 %, whereas the no alcohol group consumed tonic water. Alcohol expectancy was controlled. Subjects studied faces with or without a distinctive feature (e.g., scar, piercing). An old-new recognition test followed. Some of the test faces were “old” (i.e., previously studied), and some were “new” (i.e., not previously studied). We varied whether the new test faces had a previously studied distinctive feature versus other familiar characteristics.ResultsIntoxicated and sober recognition accuracy was comparable, but subjects in the alcohol group made more positive identifications overall compared to the no alcohol group.ConclusionsThe results are not in keeping with AMT. Rather, a more general cognitive mechanism appears to underlie false face recognition in intoxicated subjects. Specifically, acute alcohol intoxication during face learning results in more liberal choosing, perhaps because of an increased reliance on familiarity.

Two field studies on the effects of alcohol on eyewitness identification, confidence, and decision times

“…We will refer to this as the disinhibition account . This idea is in line with increased choosing rates in intoxicated versus sober participants reported in a face recognition study (Colloff & Flowe, ).…”

“…For example, Read et al () compared identification performance for an intruder (salient) versus a bystander (peripheral). Colloff and Flowe () manipulated facial distinctiveness, the idea being that distinctive (i.e., salient) faces should be less affected by intoxication compared with nondistinctive ones. Contrary to outcomes predicted by alcohol myopia theory, performance differed neither as a function of target salience (Read, Yuille, & Tollestrup, ) nor as a function of facial distinctiveness (Colloff & Flowe, ).…”

“…An alternative account of the effects of alcohol on memory suggests that intoxication is associated with lack on inhibition and therefore a more liberal decision criterion, resulting in increased correct and false identification rates, but only when still intoxicated (Colloff & Flowe, ; Dysart et al, ). We will refer to this as the disinhibition account .…”

The Effects of Alcohol Intoxication on Accuracy and the Confidence–Accuracy Relationship in Photographic Simultaneous Line‐ups

“…They reasoned that intoxicated participants in their study focused on a salient feature (i.e., hairstyle) of the ‘culprit’, which led them to misidentify the innocent suspect in the perpetrator absent showup who had a similar feature. However, a recent study found that participants who were intoxicated during encoding were no more likely than sober participants to be influenced by distinctive features during a basic face recognition task, regardless of whether they were intoxicated versus sober at test (Colloff & Flowe, 2016). In this study, participants who had studied faces while intoxicated were more likely to false alarm to any face, with or without a distinctive feature, suggesting that intoxicated participants were basing their recognition decisions on familiarity rather than identity‐based information.…”

The influence of alcohol and weapon presence on eyewitness memory and confidence

“…For example, moderately intoxicated participants in an old-new face recognition experiment were found to make more false identifications of same-race faces than sober controls, a reduction of the own-race face processing bias the study's authors attribute to alcohol disrupting the expert encoding of same-race faces (Hilliar, Kemp & Denson, 2010). Among studies incorporating more forensically relevant face memory tasks (Altman, Schreiber Compo, McQuiston, Hagsand, & Cervera, 2018;Bayless, Harvey, Kneller, & Frowd, 2018;Colloff & Flowe, 2016;Dysart, Lindsay, MacDonald, & Wicke, 2002;Flowe et al, 2017;Hagsand, Roos af Hjelmsäter, Granhag, Fahlke, & Söderpalm-Gordh, 2013a;Harvey, Kneller, & Campbell, 2013a;Kneller & Harvey, 2016;Read, Yuille, & Tollestrup, 1992;Yuille & Tollestrup, 1990), three reveal an adverse effect of alcohol intoxication on identification accuracy (Bayless et al, 2018;Dysart et al, 2002;Read et al, 1992). Read et al (1992, Experiment 2) found an alcohol-linked reduction in face identification accuracy, but from a mock-perpetrator rather than mock-witness perspective.…”