Advertisement

Self-reported face recognition is highly valid, but alone is not highly discriminative of prosopagnosia-level performance on objective assessments

  • Joseph M. ArizpeEmail author
  • Elyana Saad
  • Ayooluwa O. Douglas
  • Laura Germine
  • Jeremy B. Wilmer
  • Joseph M. DeGutis
Article

Abstract

Severe developmental deficits in face recognition ability (developmental prosopagnosia, or DP) have been vigorously studied over the past decade, yet many questions remain unanswered about their origins, nature, and social consequences. A rate-limiting factor in answering such questions is the challenge of recruiting rare DP participants. Although self-reported experiences have long played a role in efforts to identify DPs, much remains unknown about how such self-reports can or should contribute to screening or diagnosis. Here, in a large, population-based web sample, we investigated the effectiveness of self-report, used on its own, as a screen to identify individuals who will ultimately fail, at a conventional cutoff, the two types of objective tests that are most commonly used to confirm DP diagnoses: the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) and the famous faces memory test (FFMT). We used a highly reliable questionnaire (alpha = .91), the Cambridge Face Memory Questionnaire (CFMQ), and revealed strong validity via high correlations of .44 with the CFMT and .52 with the FFMT. However, cutoff analyses revealed that no CFMQ score yielded a clinical-grade combination of sensitivity and positive predictive value in enough individuals to support using it alone as a DP diagnostic or screening tool. This result was replicated in an analysis of data from the widely used PI20 questionnaire, a 20-question self-assessment of facial recognition similar in form to the CFMQ. We therefore recommend that screens for DP should, wherever possible, include objective as well as subjective assessment tools.

Keywords

Self-report Ability Individual differences Face recognition Screening Prosopagnosia Meta-cognition 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award number R01EY026057

Supplementary material

13428_2018_1195_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.7 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 2812 kb)

References

  1. Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Skinner, R., Martin, J., & Clubley, E. (2001). The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31, 5–17. doi: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005653411471 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barton, J. J. S., & Corrow, S. L. (2016). The problem of being bad at faces. Neuropsychologia, 89, 119–124. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.06.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beaudoin, M., & Desrichard, O. (2011). Are memory self-efficacy and memory performance related? A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 211–241. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bindemann, M., Attard, J., & Johnston, R. A. (2014). Perceived ability and actual recognition accuracy for unfamiliar and famous faces. Cogent Psychology, 1, 986903. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2014.986903 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bobak, A. K., Mileva, V. R., & Hancock, P. J. B. (2018). Facing the facts: Naive participants have only moderate insight into their face recognition and face perception abilities. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021818776145
  6. Bowles, D. C., McKone, E., Dawel, A., Duchaine, B., Palermo, R., Schmalzl, L., . . . Yovel, G. (2009). Diagnosing prosopagnosia: Effects of ageing, sex, and participant-stimulus ethnic match on the cambridge face memory test and cambridge face perception test. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 26, 423–455. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290903343149
  7. Crooks, V. C., Buckwalter, J. G., Petitti, D. B., Brody, K. K., & Yep, R. L. (2005). Self-reported severe memory problems as a screen for cognitive impairment and dementia. Dementia, 4, 539–551. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1471301205058310 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Heering, A., & Maurer, D. (2014). Face memory deficits in patients deprived of early visual input by bilateral congenital cataracts. Developmental Psychobiology, 56, 96–108. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.21094 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DeGutis, J., Cohan, S., Mercado, R. J., Wilmer, J., & Nakayama, K. (2012). Holistic processing of the mouth but not the eyes in developmental prosopagnosia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 29, 419–446. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2012.754745 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. DeGutis, J., Mercado, R. J., Wilmer, J., & Rosenblatt, A. (2013). Individual differences in holistic processing predict the own-race advantage in recognition memory. PLoS ONE, 8, e58253. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058253 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duchaine, B. C., & Weidenfeld, A. (2003). An evaluation of two commonly used tests of unfamiliar face recognition. Neuropsychologia, 41, 713–720. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00222-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duchaine, B. C., Yovel, G., Butterworth, E. J., & Nakayama, K. (2006). Prosopagnosia as an impairment to face-specific mechanisms: Elimination of the alternative hypotheses in a developmental case. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23, 714–747. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02643290500441296 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.07.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duchaine, B., Yovel, G., & Nakayama, K. (2007). No global processing deficit in the Navon task in 14 developmental prosopagnosics. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2, 104–113. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsm003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fawcett, T. (2006). An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 27, 861–874. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Freitas, S., Simões, M. R., Alves, L., & Santana, I. (2013). Montreal cognitive assessment: Validation study for mild cognitive impairment and alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 27, 37–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/WAD.0b013e3182420bfe CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Garrido, L., Duchaine, B., & Nakayama, K. (2008). Face detection in normal and prosopagnosic individuals. Journal of Neuropsychology, 2, 119–140. doi: https://doi.org/10.1348/174866407X246843 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Germine, L. T., Duchaine, B., & Nakayama, K. (2011). Where cognitive development and aging meet: Face learning ability peaks after age 30. Cognition, 118, 201–210. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Germine, L., Duchaine, B., & Nakayama, K. (2013). Face recognition memory data across the lifespan N approx 60,000. Retrieved from Figshare: doi: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.767320.v1
  20. Germine, L., Nakayama, K., Duchaine, B. C., Chabris, C. F., Chatterjee, G., & Wilmer, J. B. (2012). Is the Web as good as the lab? Comparable performance from Web and lab in cognitive/perceptual experiments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 847–857. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0296-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gray, K. L. H., Bird, G., & Cook, R. (2017). Robust associations between the 20-item prosopagnosia index and the Cambridge Face Memory Test in the general population. Royal Society Open Science, 4, 160923. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160923 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  23. Kennerknecht, I., Grueter, T., Welling, B., Wentzek, S., Horst, J., Edwards, S., & Grueter, M. (2006). First report of prevalence of non-syndromic hereditary prosopagnosia (HPA). American Journal of Medical Genetics, 140A, 1617–1622. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.31343 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kennerknecht, I., Nga, Y. H., & Wong, V. C. N. (2008a). Prevalence of hereditary prosopagnosia (HPA) in Hong Kong Chinese population. American Journal of Medical Genetics, Part A, 146, 2863–2870. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.32552 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kennerknecht, I., Pluempe, N., & Welling, B. (2008b). Congenital prosopagnosia—A common hereditary cognitive dysfunction in humans. Frontiers in Bioscience, 13, 3150–3158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kennerknecht, I., Plümpe, N., Edwards, S., & Raman, R. (2007). Hereditary prosopagnosia (HPA): The first report outside the Caucasian population. Journal of Human Genetics, 52, 230–236. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10038-006-0101-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Livingston, L. A., & Shah, P. (2017). People with and without prosopagnosia have insight into their face recognition ability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 1260–1262. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1310911 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Malpass, R. S., & Kravitz, J. (1969). Recognition for faces of own and other race. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 330–334. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028434 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meissner, C. A., & Brigham, J. C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7, 3–35. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Palermo, R., Rossion, B., Rhodes, G., Laguesse, R., Tez, T., Hall, B., . . . McKone, E. (2017). Do people have insight into their face recognition abilities? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 218–233. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1161058
  31. Peterson, E., & Miller, S. F. (2012). The eyes test as a measure of individual differences: How much of the variance reflects verbal IQ? Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 220. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00220 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rotshtein, P., Geng, J. J., Driver, J., & Dolan, R. J. (2007). Role of features and second-order spatial relations in face discrimination, face recognition, and individual face skills: Behavioral and functional magnetic resonance imaging data. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1435–1452. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1435 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shah, P., Gaule, A., Sowden, S., Bird, G., & Cook, R. (2015a). The 20-item prosopagnosia index (PI20): A self-report instrument for identifying developmental prosopagnosia. Royal Society Open Science, 2, 140343. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.140343 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shah, P., Sowden, S., Gaule, A., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2015b). The 20 item prosopagnosia index (PI20): Relationship with the Glasgow face-matching test. Royal Society Open Science, 2, 150305. doi: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Snowling, M., Dawes, P., Nash, H., & Hulme, C. (2012). Validity of a protocol for adult self-report of dyslexia and related difficulties. Dyslexia, 18, 1–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/dys.1432
  36. Spackman, K. A. (1989). Signal detection theory: Valuable tools for evaluating inductive learning. In A. M. Segre (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Machine Learning (pp. 160–163). San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-55860-036-2.50047-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stollhoff, R., Jost, J., Elze, T., & Kennerknecht, I. (2011). Deficits in long-term recognition memory reveal dissociated subtypes in congenital prosopagnosia. PLoS ONE, 6, e15702. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015702 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Turano, M. T., Marzi, T., & Viggiano, M. P. (2016). Individual differences in face processing captured by ERPs. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 101, 1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.12.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Turano, M. T., & Viggiano, M. P. (2017). The relationship between face recognition ability and socioemotional functioning throughout adulthood. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 24, 613–630. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2016.1244247 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. White, D., Kemp, R. I., Jenkins, R., Matheson, M., & Burton, A. M. (2014). Passport officers’ errors in face matching. PLoS ONE, 9, e103510. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103510 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilmer, J. B. (2017). Individual differences in face recognition: A decade of discovery. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 225–230. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417710693 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wilmer, J. B., Germine, L., Chabris, C. F., Chatterjee, G., Gerbasi, M., & Nakayama, K. (2012). Capturing specific abilities as a window into human individuality: The example of face recognition. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 29, 360–392. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2012.753433 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wilmer, J. B., Germine, L., Chabris, C. F., Chatterjee, G., Williams, M., Loken, E., . . . Duchaine, B. (2010). Human face recognition ability is specific and highly heritable. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 5238–5241. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0913053107
  44. Wilmer, J. B., Germine, L. T., & Nakayama, K. (2014). Face recognition: A model specific ability. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 769. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00769 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wilson, E. B. (1927). Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 22, 209–212. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1927.10502953 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Winblad, B., Palmer, K., Kivipelto, M., Jelic, V., Fratiglioni, L., Wahlund, L.-O., . . . Petersen, R. C. (2004). Mild cognitive impairment—Beyond controversies, towards a consensus: Report of the International Working Group on Mild Cognitive Impairment. Journal of Internal Medicine, 256, 240–246. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2004.01380.x
  47. Youden, W. J. (1950). Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer, 3, 32–35. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1<32::AID-CNCR2820030106>3.0.CO;2-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychiatryHarvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA
  2. 2.Boston Attention and Learning LaboratoryVA Boston Healthcare SystemBostonUSA
  3. 3.Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)Fort Sam HoustonUSA
  4. 4.Institute for Technology in PsychiatryMcLean HospitalBelmontUSA
  5. 5.Department of PsychologyWellesley CollegeWellesleyUSA

Personalised recommendations