Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes

Face images depicting the same individual can differ substantially from one another. Ecological variation in pose, expression, lighting, and other sources of appearance variability complicates the recognition and matching of unfamiliar faces, but acquired familiarity leads to the ability to cope wit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Benjamin Balas, Adam Sandford, Kay Ritchie
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2023-05-01
Series:i-Perception
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/20416695231171355
_version_ 1797833749515206656
author Benjamin Balas
Adam Sandford
Kay Ritchie
author_facet Benjamin Balas
Adam Sandford
Kay Ritchie
author_sort Benjamin Balas
collection DOAJ
description Face images depicting the same individual can differ substantially from one another. Ecological variation in pose, expression, lighting, and other sources of appearance variability complicates the recognition and matching of unfamiliar faces, but acquired familiarity leads to the ability to cope with these challenges. Among the many ways that face of the same individual can vary, some images are judged to be better likenesses of familiar individuals than others. Simply put, these images look more like the individual under consideration than others. But what does it mean for an image to be a better likeness than another? Does likeness entail typicality, or is it something distinct from this? We examined the relationship between the likeness of face images and the similarity of those images to average images of target individuals using a set of famous faces selected for reciprocal familiarity/unfamiliarity across US and UK participants. We found that though likeness judgments are correlated with similarity-to-prototype judgments made by both familiar and unfamiliar participants, this correlation was smaller than the correlation between similarity judgments made by different participant groups. This implies that while familiarity weakens the relationship between likeness and similarity-to-prototype judgments, it does not change similarity-to-prototype judgments to the same degree.
first_indexed 2024-04-09T14:29:11Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4049346c6d55425bb0d2477f282b1b74
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2041-6695
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-09T14:29:11Z
publishDate 2023-05-01
publisher SAGE Publishing
record_format Article
series i-Perception
spelling doaj.art-4049346c6d55425bb0d2477f282b1b742023-05-03T17:06:18ZengSAGE Publishingi-Perception2041-66952023-05-011410.1177/20416695231171355Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypesBenjamin BalasAdam SandfordKay RitchieFace images depicting the same individual can differ substantially from one another. Ecological variation in pose, expression, lighting, and other sources of appearance variability complicates the recognition and matching of unfamiliar faces, but acquired familiarity leads to the ability to cope with these challenges. Among the many ways that face of the same individual can vary, some images are judged to be better likenesses of familiar individuals than others. Simply put, these images look more like the individual under consideration than others. But what does it mean for an image to be a better likeness than another? Does likeness entail typicality, or is it something distinct from this? We examined the relationship between the likeness of face images and the similarity of those images to average images of target individuals using a set of famous faces selected for reciprocal familiarity/unfamiliarity across US and UK participants. We found that though likeness judgments are correlated with similarity-to-prototype judgments made by both familiar and unfamiliar participants, this correlation was smaller than the correlation between similarity judgments made by different participant groups. This implies that while familiarity weakens the relationship between likeness and similarity-to-prototype judgments, it does not change similarity-to-prototype judgments to the same degree.https://doi.org/10.1177/20416695231171355
spellingShingle Benjamin Balas
Adam Sandford
Kay Ritchie
Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes
i-Perception
title Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes
title_full Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes
title_fullStr Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes
title_full_unstemmed Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes
title_short Not the norm: Face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes
title_sort not the norm face likeness is not the same as similarity to familiar face prototypes
url https://doi.org/10.1177/20416695231171355
work_keys_str_mv AT benjaminbalas notthenormfacelikenessisnotthesameassimilaritytofamiliarfaceprototypes
AT adamsandford notthenormfacelikenessisnotthesameassimilaritytofamiliarfaceprototypes
AT kayritchie notthenormfacelikenessisnotthesameassimilaritytofamiliarfaceprototypes