Much of how we use our perception involves judgements on how similar things are: You might vaguely recognise an actor's face in a movie but not immediately recognise where you have seen it before. Some people claim to be "bad with faces". Is that in fact based on objectively poorer ability to recognise faces? Psychophysical lab studies of perception typically use forced-choice discrimination tasks in which participants must make explicit, and usually binary, decisions. Such designs can yield parametric information about underlying perceptual processes, but it is very different from how we use perception in daily life.

 

Here, Moharramipour and colleagues (2024) seek to better understand the link between such subjective similarity jugdements and objective discrimination ability. They argue that subjective similarity can be considered a metacognitive process, reflecting the person's awareness of their perceptual capacity. Participants will be asked to discriminate face pairs across a spectrum of morphing steps in a classical forced-choice paradigm to estimate perceptual threshold performance, as well as provide subjective ratings of similarity of the face pairs. The researchers hypothesise a correlation between objective perceptual ability and subjective similarity judgements. They will evaluate this at the group level, and also use a resampling approach to determine the specificity of this relationship in individual participants. Confirming this hypothesis would advance our knowledge of how perceptual ability links with our metacognitive introspection of it. Are you really "bad with faces" or do you only think you are?

 

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated over two rounds of in-depth review. Based on detailed responses to the reviewers' comments, the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 1 criteria and awarded in-principle acceptance (IPA).

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/pzugy
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA.
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals: 

 

 

Moharramipour, A., Zhou, W., Rahnev, D., & Lau, H. (2024). Is subjective perceptual similarity metacognitive? In principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/pzugy

When we familiarise with new faces over repeated exposures, it is generally in situations that have meaning for us. Seeing a face more often tends to go along with learning more about the person, and their likely contexts and actions. In this Registered Report, Noad and Andrews (2024) tested whether meaningful context during exposure improves the consolidation of faces into long-term memory. Participants were shown video clips from the TV series Life on Mars, either in their original chronological sequence, which provides meaningful context, or in a scrambled sequence. It was expected that the original sequence would provide a better conceptual understanding, and this was confirmed by free recall and structured question tests. Face recognition memory was tested with images of the actor from the original clips (‘in show’) and the same actor from another show (‘out-of-show’), to test whether memory was modulated by the similarity of appearance to that at encoding. Face recognition was tested immediately after exposure and after four weeks, to allow time for consolidation. As expected, recognition memory was better for participants in the meaningful context condition, and for in-show faces. However, meaningful context did not lead to less forgetting of the faces at the follow up test, even for in-show faces, which did not support the original predictions. An exploratory analysis found that a metric of overlap between pairs of participants’ conceptual understanding was related to overlap in the set of faces they recognised. This relationship was stronger after four weeks, which suggests increased interaction of conceptual knowledge and face recognition after consolidation.

 

The Stage 2 manuscript was assessed over two rounds of review, and the recommender judged that the manuscript met the Stage 2 criteria for recommendation.

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/8wp6f
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that was used to answer the research question was generated until after IPA. 
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:

 

 

References
 
1. Noad, K. & Andrews, T. J. (2024). The importance of conceptual knowledge when becoming familiar
with faces during naturalistic viewing [Stage 2]. Acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/thgrz

When we familiarise with new faces over repeated exposures, it is in situations that have meaning for us. Here, Noad and Andrews (2023) ask whether meaningful context during exposure matters for the consolidation of faces into long-term memory. Participants will be shown video clips from TV shows that are ordered either in their original chronological sequence, preserving meaningful context, or in a scrambled sequence. It is expected that the original sequence will provide a better understanding of the narrative. The critical question is whether this will also be associated with differences in memory for the faces. Memory will be tested with images of the actor from the original clips (‘in show’) or images of the same actor from another show (‘out-of-show’), both immediately after exposure and following a four-week delay. It is predicted that memory for faces will be better retained across the delay when the original exposure was in a meaningful context, and that this benefit will be enhanced for ‘in-show’ images, where the person’s appearance matches with the original context. The pre-registered predictions and the targeted effect sizes for this study are informed by pilot data reported within the manuscript.

 

The Stage 1 manuscript was evaluated through an initial round of editorial review, followed by a further round of external review, after which the recommender judged that it met the Stage 1 criteria for in-principle acceptance (IPA).

 

URL to the preregistered Stage 1 protocol: https://osf.io/8wp6f
 
Level of bias control achieved: Level 6. No part of the data or evidence that will be used to answer the research question yet exists and no part will be generated until after IPA. 
 
List of eligible PCI RR-friendly journals:

 

 
References
 
1. Noad, K. & Andrews, T. J. (2023). The importance of consolidating perceptual experience and contextual knowledge in face recognition, in principle acceptance of Version 4 by Peer Community in Registered Reports. https://osf.io/8wp6f