Face diet revealed: A study of daily exposure to faces in adult observers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A variety of well-established phenomena in face perception are often explained based on the 'face diet'—the contents of daily exposure to faces. For example, the face inversion effect and the other-race effect are believed to stem from minimal exposure to inverted and other-race faces, respectively. Face perception involves a protracted development period and remains malleable well into adulthood (Germine, Duchaine, Nakayama, 2011; Rhodes et al. 2011). Previous studies focused on the face diet in infancy (Jayaraman, Fausey, Smith, 2015; Sugden, Mohamed-Ali, Moulson, 2013). We present the first report on the face diet of adults (N=29) via a head-mounted camera. Our aim was to 1) provide empirical evidence for widely-believed assumptions such as the predominance of own-race and upright faces; 2) examine unknown aspects of the face diet regarding gender, familiarity, and pose; 3) test whether visual experience with faces occurs most often at close social distances, a hypothesis that was borne out of previous work (Oruc, Barton, 2010; Yang, Shafai, Oruc, 2014). Out of the 25,691 recorded frames (>214 hours of footage), 7475 faces were detected and annotated for gender, ethnicity, size, familiarity and pose. No inverted faces and no differences between exposure to faces of either gender were observed. Majority of faces were own-race (>85%). Faces were most frequently seen in the three-quarters pose, followed by frontal, and then by profile. Over 75% of faces were familiar, reflecting the longer periods of interaction with familiar individuals in contrast to brief encounters with strangers. Seventy-three percent of all faces were viewed from 1.5 m or closer, peaking at 89 cm (median), corresponding to a face size of about 8-9 degrees visual angle. These results confirm widely-accepted assumptions regarding the contents of the face diet and furthermore provide a potential explanation for effects of size in face recognition performance. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2017
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".