↓ Skip to main content

Understanding face recognition.

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Psychology, August 1986
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
1 Wikipedia page
1 video uploader

Readers on

1354 Mendeley
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Understanding face recognition.
Published in
British Journal of Psychology, August 1986
Pubmed ID

V Bruce, A Young, Bruce, V, Young, A


The aim of this paper is to develop a theoretical model and a set of terms for understanding and discussing how we recognize familiar faces, and the relationship between recognition and other aspects of face processing. It is suggested that there are seven distinct types of information that we derive from seen faces; these are labelled pictorial, structural, visually derived semantic, identity-specific semantic, name, expression and facial speech codes. A functional model is proposed in which structural encoding processes provide descriptions suitable for the analysis of facial speech, for analysis of expression and for face recognition units. Recognition of familiar faces involves a match between the products of structural encoding and previously stored structural codes describing the appearance of familiar faces, held in face recognition units. Identity-specific semantic codes are then accessed from person identity nodes, and subsequently name codes are retrieved. It is also proposed that the cognitive system plays an active role in deciding whether or not the initial match is sufficiently close to indicate true recognition or merely a 'resemblance'; several factors are seen as influencing such decisions. This functional model is used to draw together data from diverse sources including laboratory experiments, studies of everyday errors, and studies of patients with different types of cerebral injury. It is also used to clarify similarities and differences between processes for object, word and face recognition.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,354 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 27 2%
United States 13 <1%
Germany 9 <1%
Canada 8 <1%
Japan 5 <1%
Israel 4 <1%
Netherlands 3 <1%
Belgium 3 <1%
Italy 3 <1%
Other 35 3%
Unknown 1244 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 286 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 268 20%
Student > Master 218 16%
Researcher 160 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 72 5%
Other 247 18%
Unknown 103 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 756 56%
Neuroscience 91 7%
Computer Science 90 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 67 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 54 4%
Other 145 11%
Unknown 151 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 June 2017.
All research outputs
of 11,298,449 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Psychology
of 686 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 250,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Psychology
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,298,449 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 686 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 250,888 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.