“I prefer to think of myself of just doing the task I was assigned.”
4 Likes
74%, in the top 5%!
I thought the sorting was easier than the y/n. Commit a feature or three to memory and match based on those.
3 Likes
When I’ve participated in studies in-person that deceived us on what the study was about, they had to tell us what it was actually about at the end. I’d be amazed if Australia’s ethics committees were incompatible with UKs.
2 Likes
Only when in motion. 
In all honesty, I think it was more the way her shoulders moved. From 200 ft away (the distance between two telephone poles is about 100ft), specific details are not discernible, but movement is. That movement somehow reflected her personality, and that was what triggered the recognition. She was a smart and happy person in a unique and specific way–like you might notice in the sound of someone’s voice.
3 Likes
Fair play. No judge.
2 Likes
No ill taken. She was very easy on the eyes, though. 
32 out of 40 and 56 out of 80; 73%
Me too. I think I may have done better when I got annoyed. A new study is called for Annoyance as a Means to Enhanced Facial Recognition.
3 Likes
For me some of the ones that came up more than likely were people i did actually recognize but i tend to talk myself out of or into picking certain things because i often assume that the people putting together the test are trying to be more clever than they actually are trying to be.
3 Likes
Evidently, according to this test, I wouldn’t recognize my own mother.
2 Likes
The review boards for this kind of passive participation are sometimes pretty lax. I didn’t sign up for the e-mail report but it may be that this would detail the possible results of the experiment. They aren’t technically deceiving you about the data they are collecting, rather they just aren’t telling you what it is.
1 Like
It’s COVID. Nobody can recognize their own mother any more.
4 Likes
Gait recognition is a thing.
6 Likes
Got 73% - 24 out of 40 on memory, and 63 out of 80 in sorting.
4 Likes
63% / barely above the Top 50%. Memory Test 24/40 and face sorting 52/80.
Honestly that’s better than I thought I would do. I usually don’t recognize people that recognize me.
2 Likes
56%
I’m shit with names too
3 Likes
I’m great at recognizing bit-part actors who have been in other shows, but this kind of test only 63%. Fast recognition is not my forte.
2 Likes
On the UNSW Face Memory Test you scored 23 out of 40.
On the UNSW Face Sorting Test you scored 48 out of 80.
Your overall score on the UNSW Face Test was 59%.
Wow, I’m bad at this.
3 Likes
I have aphantasia … so not sure if I should even bother.
2 Likes
I performed mediocrely, which is really funny, as I’m usually eerily good at picking out even the most casual acquaintances. Identical twins rarely seem at all identical to me. I even once managed to randomly find a Chinese professor I’d only loosely interacted with from my department, late at night in a Sydney Chinatown grocery store based on a half second glimpse of him walking away in a trench coat.
The impression I kept getting was that the flat photos are really poor references for me to get a feel for someone. I started focusing on individual differences in the face, which made me feel like I was performing worse, when usually my recognition is much more holistic and instinctive. I wonder if I would perform better if the reference shots were videos of the person talking in a natural manner.
6 Likes
Just over half in all assessments. I thought I was doing better but perhaps reflective of cognitive decline.
2 Likes
