Abstract
The effects of movement on unfamiliar face recognition were investigated. In an incidental learning task, faces were studied either as computer-animated (moving) displays or as a series of static images, with identical numbers of frames shown for each. The movements were either nonrigid transformations (changes in expression) or rigid rotations in depth (nodding or shaking). At test, participants saw either single, static images or moving sequences. Only one experiment showed a significant effect of study type, in favor of static instances. There was no additional advantage from studying faces in motion in these experiments, in which both study types showed the same amounts of information. Recognition memory was relatively unaffected by changes in expression between study and test. Effects of viewpoint change were large when expressive transformations had been studied but much smaller when rigid rotations in depth had been studied. The series of experiments did reveal a slight advantage for testing memory with moving compared with static faces, consistent with recent findings using familiar faces. Future work will need to examine whether such effects may also be due to the additional information provided by an animated sequence.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bartlett, J. C., &Leslie, J. E. (1986). Aging and memory for faces versus single views of faces.Memory & Cognition,14, 371–381.
Bassili, J. N. (1978). Facial motion in the perception of faces and of emotional expression.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 373–379.
Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition by components: A theory of human image understanding.Psychological Review,94, 115–145.
Bruce, V. (1982). Changing faces: Visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition.British Journal of Psychology,73, 105–116.
Bruce, V. (1994). Stability from variation: The case of face recognition: The M. D. Vernon Memorial Lecture.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,47A, 5–28.
Bruce, V., &Valentine, T. (1988). When a nod’s as good as a wink. The role of dynamic information in facial recognition. In M. M. Gruneberg & E. Morris (Eds.),Practical aspects of memory: Current research and issues (pp. 169–174). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bruce, V., &Young, A. W. (1986). Understanding face recognition.British Journal of Psychology,77, 305–327.
Cabeza, R., Bruce ,V., Kato, T., & Oda, M. (in press). The prototype effect in face recognition: Extension and limits.Memory & Cognition.
Davies, G. M., Ellis, H. D., &Shepherd, J. W. (1978). Face recognition as a function of mode of representation.Journal of Applied Psychology,63, 180–187.
Hill, H., &Bruce, V. (1996). Effects of lighting on matching facial surfaces.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 986–1004.
Klatzky, R. L., &Forrest, F. H. (1984). Recognizing familiar and unfamiliar faces.Memory & Cognition,12, 60–70.
Knight, B., &Johnston, A. (1997). The role of movement in face recognition.Visual Cognition,4, 265–274.
Loftus, G. R., &Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 476–490.
Marr, D., &Nishihara, H. K. (1978). Representation and recognition of the spatial organisation of three-dimensional shapes.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B,200, 269–294.
Perrett, D. I., Smith, D. D., Potter, P. A. J., Mistlin, A. J., Head, A. S., Milner, A. D., &Jeeves, M. A. (1985). Visual cells in the temporal cortex sensitive to face view and gaze direction.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B,223, 293–317.
Pike, G. E., Kemp, R. I., Towell, N. A., &Phillips, K. C. (1997). Recognizing moving faces: The relative contribution of motion and perspective view information.Visual Cognition,4, 409–438.
Schiff, W., Banka, L., &de Bordes Galai, G. (1986). Recognizing people seen in events via dynamic mug-shots.American Journal of Psychology,99, 219–231.
Shapiro, P. N., &Penrod, S. (1986). Meta-analysis of facial identification studies.Psychological Bulletin,100, 139–156.
Shepherd, J. W., Ellis, H. D., &Davies, G. H. (1982).Identification evidence: A psychological evaluation. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen Press.
Snodgrass, J. G., &Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory—Applications to dementia and amnesia.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,117, 34–50.
Tarr, M. J., &Bulthoff, H. H. (1995). Is human object recognition better described by geon-structural-descriptions, or by multiple views?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 1494–1505.
Tulving, E., &Thomson, D. (1983). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in memory.Psychological Review,80, 352–372.
Ullman, S. (1979).The interpretation of visual motion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vokey, J. R., &Read, J. D. (1992). Familiarity, memorability, and the effect of typicality on the recognition of faces.Memory & Cognition,20, 291–302.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
—Accepted by previous editor, Geoffrey R. Loftus
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Christie, F., Bruce, V. The role of dynamic information in the recognition of unfamiliar faces. Memory & Cognition 26, 780–790 (1998). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211397
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211397