Abstract
We describe a new test for unfamiliar face matching, the Glasgow Face Matching Test (GFMT). Viewers are shown pairs of faces, photographed in full-face view but with different cameras, and are asked to make same/different judgments. The full version of the test comprises 168 face pairs, and we also describe a shortened version with 40 pairs. We provide normative data for these tests derived from large subject samples. We also describe associations between the GFMT and other tests of matching and memory. The new test correlates moderately with face memory but more strongly with object matching, a result that is consistent with previous research highlighting a link between object and face matching, specific to unfamiliar faces. The test is available free for scientific use.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Benton, A. L., Hamsher, K. S., Varney, N. R., & Spreen, O. (1983). Contributions to neuropsychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bruce, V., Henderson, Z., Greenwood, K., Hancock, P., Burton, A. M., & Miller, P. (1999). Verification of face identities from images captured on video. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5, 339–360.
Bruce, V., Henderson, Z., Newman, C., & Burton, A. M. (2001). Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 207–218.
Bruce, V., & Young, A. W. (1986). Understanding face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 305–327.
Burton, A. M., Jenkins, R., Hancock, P. J. B., & White, D. (2005). Robust representations for face recognition: The power of averages. Cognitive Psychology, 51, 256–284.
Clutterbuck, R., & Johnston, R. A. (2002). Exploring levels of face familiarity by using an indirect face-matching measure. Perception, 31, 985–994.
Clutterbuck, R., & Johnston, R. A. (2004). Matching as an index of face familiarity. Visual Cognition, 11, 857–869.
Clutterbuck, R., & Johnston, R. A. (2005). Demonstrating how unfamiliar faces become familiar using a face matching task. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 97–116.
Davis, J., & Valentine, T. (2009). CCTV on trial: Matching video images with the defendant in the dock. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 482–505.
Duchaine, B., & Nakayama, K. (2006). The Cambridge Face Memory Test: Results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants. Neuropsychologia, 44, 576–585.
Hancock, P. J. B., Bruce, V., & Burton, A. M. (2000). Recognition of unfamiliar faces. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 330–337.
Jenkins, R., & Burton, A. M. (2008). 100% accuracy in automatic face recognition. Science, 319, 435.
Kagan, J. (1965). Reflection-impulsivity and reading ability in primary grade children. Child Development, 36, 609–628.
Lane, S. M., & Meissner, C. A. (2008). A “middle road” approach to bridging the basic-applied divide in eyewitness identification research. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 779–787.
Malpass, R. S., & Devine, P. G. (1981). Eyewitness identification: Lineup instructions and the absence of the offender. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 482–489.
Megreya, A. M., & Burton, A. M. (2006). Unfamiliar faces are not faces: Evidence from a matching task. Memory & Cognition, 34, 865–876.
Megreya, A. M., & Burton, A. M. (2007). Hits and false positives in face matching: A familiarity-based dissociation. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 1175–1184.
Megreya, A. M., & Burton, A. M. (2008). Matching faces to photographs: Poor performance in eyewitness memory (without the memory). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14, 364–372.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
Rossion, B., & Pourtois, G. (2004). Revisiting Snodgrass and Vanderwart’s object set: The role of surface detail in basic-level object recognition. Perception, 33, 217–236.
Searcy, J. H., Bartlett, J. C., & Memon, A. (1999). Age differences in accuracy and choosing in eyewitness identification and face recognition. Memory & Cognition, 27, 538–552.
Warrington, E. K. (1984). Recognition Memory Test. Windsor, U.K.: NFER-Nelson.
Wells, G. L., & Olson, E. (2003). Eyewitness identification. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 277–295.bet 10
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by Grant 000-23-1348 from the ESRC to A.M.B. and A.M. The full GFMT and the short version are available for download from the authors’ Web site at www.psy.gla.ac.uk/gfmt. The test is free for research use, and the download package includes instructions, scoring sheets, and the norm data presented here. All those who volunteered use of their faces for this test have provided written permission for the images to be used for any research purposes, including scientific publication. The full database of images (Glasgow Unfamiliar Face Database) from which the test was derived is available at the same site.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Burton, A.M., White, D. & McNeill, A. The Glasgow Face Matching Test. Behavior Research Methods 42, 286–291 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.1.286
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.1.286