Tag Archives: Science Network

Facial recognition technology can be foiled with a photograph?

Marr, Chris Retinal scans and fingerprint checks: high tech or high risk? Science Network. April 22nd 2016.



Influence of cross-race effect and anxiety on face recognition in Australian study

A pity this science news article does not include a link to the study, as the results sound interesting.

I wonder how a super-recognizer might have fared as a study subject in this study? Would supers have the self-confidence to avoid the impairment in performance that comes with anxiety, while not being so over-confident that they fail to take the extra care to see through racial bias while memorizing and recalling foreign faces? Are metacognitive skills an element of super-recognition? Could this be a clue to why face memory is a cognitive ability that peaks in performance at a remarkably late age in human development? (Please remember, readers in academia, that if you use without acknowledgement original ideas that you have read at this blog, I will not be pleased at all.)

Payne, Rob Anxiety increases error, but not bias, in facial recognition. Science Network. November 20th 2015.



Colour-blindness a variation in visual perception ability possibly endowing advantages relevant to work performance, rather than simply a disability

Payne, Rob Colour-blindness may aid in search and rescue effort. Science Network. November 11th 2015.

The idea that colour-blindness can be advantagous is not new to me, as last year I watched with great interest a story on ABC24’s News Breakfast in which the colour-blind presenter Michael Rowland explained his advantage over people with normal colour vision in visually detecting camouflaged items. Unfortunately the clip of this story is no longer available to view.

Vision scientist explains colour blindness. ABC News Breakfast. 7 Apr 2014.



University of Western Australia researchers’ model of face gender published in PLoS ONE

Garland, Carys Face ‘model’ accurately weighs gender points. ScienceNetwork WA. July 6th 2014.


The mathematical model of face gender that these UWA researchers have come up with seems like a sensible enough idea to me (and who am I to criticise?) but I’m very doubtful of just about everything stated about face gender and its relation to autism that is written in the Science Network article.

Gilani SZ, Rooney K, Shafait F, Walters M, Mian A (2014) Geometric Facial Gender Scoring: Objectivity of Perception. PLoS ONE 9(6): e99483. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0099483


UWA seminar on Tuesday could be interesting

“In this seminar, I will present data on three inter-related aspects of attentional focusing: the spatiotemporal dynamics of focusing, object representations and their role in focusing, and the consequences of focusing on visual processing.”

I’m quite interested in visual processing, although I’m not a professional researcher in psychology. I’m not a professional researcher in anything at all. I don’t get paid, I think in my own time. If I were to follow the current zeitgeist I’d be playing sport instead of thinking (Australia has a federal minister for sport but none for science I believe), but I’m not one to follow trends.

The speaker of this upcoming seminar at UWA is Dr. Lisa Jefferies. Unless I am mistaken, another area of research that she has explored is face perception, but there is no hint that face perception will be covered in this seminar.

To be (broad) or not to be (broad): The dynamics of attentional focusing. Science Network Western Australia. http://www.sciencewa.net.au/component/ohanah/to-be-broad-or-not-to-be-broad-the-dynamics-of-attentional-focusing.html

Lisa Jefferies http://www2.psych.ubc.ca/~ennslab/Vision_Lab/Lisa_Jefferies.html

Colloquium:  To be (broad) or not to be (broad).  http://events.uwa.edu.au/event/20130910T045244Z-2131-4946@events.uwa.edu.au/whatson/Faculty%20of%20Education