专业筛选者优先身份信息对面部匹配的影响

Kristopher Korbelak, Kevin Zish, Daniel Endres
{"title":"专业筛选者优先身份信息对面部匹配的影响","authors":"Kristopher Korbelak, Kevin Zish, Daniel Endres","doi":"10.1177/21695067231192652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using a computer-based face matching task we objectively measured face matching performance (reaction time, sensitivity, accuracy) as a function of prior identity source type (Artificial Intelligence (AI), human, none), prior information accuracy (accurate, inaccurate) and task difficulty (high, low) in professional screeners. Participants were required to judge how similar they thought a pair of faces were, to decide whether the faces in each pair were the same person, and then to judge the difficulty of that decision. Professional screeners were more accurate, faster, and, more sensitive when normative task difficulty was low. Professional screeners were also more accurate, faster, and more sensitive when prior identity source information was accurate. There was no main effect of prior identity source type on performance (there was a trend-level effect). Face matching accuracy positively correlated with normative data from non-professional screeners. Professional screeners were more accurate 80.6% of the time, compared to non-professional screeners.","PeriodicalId":74544,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting","volume":"32 20","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Face Matching as a Function of Prior Identity Information in Professional Screeners\",\"authors\":\"Kristopher Korbelak, Kevin Zish, Daniel Endres\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21695067231192652\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using a computer-based face matching task we objectively measured face matching performance (reaction time, sensitivity, accuracy) as a function of prior identity source type (Artificial Intelligence (AI), human, none), prior information accuracy (accurate, inaccurate) and task difficulty (high, low) in professional screeners. Participants were required to judge how similar they thought a pair of faces were, to decide whether the faces in each pair were the same person, and then to judge the difficulty of that decision. Professional screeners were more accurate, faster, and, more sensitive when normative task difficulty was low. Professional screeners were also more accurate, faster, and more sensitive when prior identity source information was accurate. There was no main effect of prior identity source type on performance (there was a trend-level effect). Face matching accuracy positively correlated with normative data from non-professional screeners. Professional screeners were more accurate 80.6% of the time, compared to non-professional screeners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting\",\"volume\":\"32 20\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21695067231192652\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society ... Annual Meeting. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. Annual meeting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21695067231192652","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

利用基于计算机的人脸匹配任务,我们客观地测量了专业筛选者的人脸匹配性能(反应时间、灵敏度、准确性)作为先验身份来源类型(人工智能、人类、无)、先验信息准确性(准确、不准确)和任务难度(高、低)的函数。参与者被要求判断一组面孔的相似程度,判断每对面孔是否是同一个人,然后判断做出这个决定的难度。当标准任务难度较低时,专业筛选者更准确、更快、更敏感。当先前的身份来源信息准确时,专业筛选者也更准确、更快、更敏感。先前身份源类型对性能没有主要影响(有趋势水平效应)。人脸匹配正确率与非专业筛选者的规范数据正相关。与非专业筛选者相比,专业筛选者的准确率为80.6%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Face Matching as a Function of Prior Identity Information in Professional Screeners
Using a computer-based face matching task we objectively measured face matching performance (reaction time, sensitivity, accuracy) as a function of prior identity source type (Artificial Intelligence (AI), human, none), prior information accuracy (accurate, inaccurate) and task difficulty (high, low) in professional screeners. Participants were required to judge how similar they thought a pair of faces were, to decide whether the faces in each pair were the same person, and then to judge the difficulty of that decision. Professional screeners were more accurate, faster, and, more sensitive when normative task difficulty was low. Professional screeners were also more accurate, faster, and more sensitive when prior identity source information was accurate. There was no main effect of prior identity source type on performance (there was a trend-level effect). Face matching accuracy positively correlated with normative data from non-professional screeners. Professional screeners were more accurate 80.6% of the time, compared to non-professional screeners.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信