Premium
Are super‐face‐recognisers also super‐voice‐recognisers? Evidence from cross‐modal identification tasks
Author(s) -
Jenkins Ryan E.,
Tsermentseli Stella,
Monks Claire P.,
Robertson David J.,
Stevenage Sarah V.,
Symons Ashley E.,
Davis Josh P.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
applied cognitive psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.719
H-Index - 100
eISSN - 1099-0720
pISSN - 0888-4080
DOI - 10.1002/acp.3813
Subject(s) - speech recognition , psychology , face (sociological concept) , identification (biology) , matching (statistics) , memory test , perception , suspect , computer science , cognitive psychology , cognition , linguistics , philosophy , botany , biology , statistics , mathematics , criminology , neuroscience
Summary Individual differences in face identification ability range from prosopagnosia to super‐recognition. The current study examined whether face identification ability predicts voice identification ability (participants: N = 529). Superior‐face‐identifiers (exceptional at face memory and matching), superior‐face‐recognisers (exceptional at face memory only), superior‐face‐matchers (exceptional face matchers only), and controls completed the Bangor Voice Matching Test, Glasgow Voice Memory Test, and a Famous Voice Recognition Test. Meeting predictions, those possessing exceptional face memory and matching skills outperformed typical‐range face groups at voice memory and voice matching respectively. Proportionally more super‐face‐identifiers also achieved our super‐voice‐recogniser criteria on two or more tests. Underlying cross‐modality (voices vs. faces) and cross‐task (memory vs. perception) mechanisms may therefore drive superior performances. Dissociations between Glasgow Voice Memory Test voice and bell recognition also suggest voice‐specific effects to match those found with faces. These findings have applied implications for policing, particularly in cases when only suspect voice clips are available.