Skip to main content

Table 1 Literature measuring correlation with the Cambridge Face Memory Test

From: The importance of decision bias for predicting eyewitness lineup choices: toward a Lineup Skills Test

Paper Predictor r N CI lower CI upper
Bobak et al., 2016 Face-matching HR 0.61a 27 0.29 0.8
Face-matching FAR 0.57a 27 0.24 0.78
Face memory target-present trials 0.38a 27 0 0.67
Face memory target-absent trials 0.46a 27 0.1 0.72
Bowles et al., 2009 CFPT 0.61 124 0.24 0.8
McGugin et al., 2012 Holistic processing test 0.26 109 0.09 0.44
McKone et al., 2011 CFMT-Aus 0.61 74 0.44 0.74
  1. Where not reported, 95% CIs calculated using vassarstats.net/rho.html
  2. CI confidence interval, CFMT-Aus Cambridge Face Memory Test (Australia), CFPT Cambridge Face Perception Test, FAR False alarm rate, HR Hit rate
  3. aSpearman’s rho calculated by authors, used here as well