↓ Skip to main content

Those Virtual People all Look the Same to me: Computer-Rendered Faces Elicit a Higher False Alarm Rate Than Real Human Faces in a Recognition Memory Task

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2018
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
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.
Title
Those Virtual People all Look the Same to me: Computer-Rendered Faces Elicit a Higher False Alarm Rate Than Real Human Faces in a Recognition Memory Task
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01362
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jari Kätsyri

Abstract

Virtual as compared with real human characters can elicit a sense of uneasiness in human observers, characterized by lack of familiarity and even feelings of eeriness (the "uncanny valley" hypothesis). Here we test the possibility that this alleged lack of familiarity is literal in the sense that people have lesser perceptual expertise in processing virtual as compared with real human faces. Sixty-four participants took part in a recognition memory study in which they first learned a set of faces and were then asked to recognize them in a testing session. We used real and virtual (computer-rendered) versions of the same faces, presented in either upright or inverted orientation. Real and virtual faces were matched for low-level visual features such as global luminosity and spatial frequency contents. Our results demonstrated a higher response bias toward responding "seen before" for virtual as compared with real faces, which was further explained by a higher false alarm rate for the former. This finding resembles a similar effect for recognizing human faces from other than one's own ethnic groups (the "other race effect"). Virtual faces received clearly higher subjective eeriness ratings than real faces. Our results did not provide evidence of poorer overall recognition memory or lesser inversion effect for virtual faces, however. The higher false alarm rate finding supports the notion that lesser perceptual expertise may contribute to the lack of subjective familiarity with virtual faces. We discuss alternative interpretations and provide suggestions for future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 26%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 34%
Neuroscience 6 17%
Engineering 3 9%
Physics and Astronomy 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 6 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 12 April 2022.
All research outputs
#3,169,745
of 25,712,965 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,122
of 34,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,671
of 342,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#179
of 717 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,712,965 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 34,754 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 342,582 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 717 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.