Bainbridge, W. A., Pounder, Z., Eardley, A. F., & Baker, C. I. (2021). Quantifying aphantasia through drawing: Those without visual imagery show deficits in object but not spatial memory. Cortex, 135, 159–172.
Bartlett, J. C., Searcy, J. H., & Abdi, H. (2003). What are the routes to face recognition. In G. Rhodes & M. A. Peterson (Eds.), Perception of faces, objects, and scenes: Analytics and holistic processes (pp. 21–52). Oxford University Press.
Bindemann, M., & Hole, G. J. (2020). Understanding face identification through within-person variability in appearance: Introduction to a virtual special issue. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73, NP1–NP8.
Bruce, V., & Young, A. (2012). Recognizing faces. In Face perception (pp. 253–314). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Burton, A. M. (2013). Why has research in face recognition progressed so slowly? The importance of variability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 1467–1485.
Carlson, C. A., Hemby, J. A., Wooten, A. R., Jones, A. R., Lockamyeir, R. F., Carlson, M. A., et al. (2021). Testing encoding specificity and the diagnostic feature-detection theory of eyewitness identification, with implications for showups, lineups, and partially disguised perpetrators. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 6, 1–21.
Carragher, D. J., & Hancock, P. J. (2020). Surgical face masks impair human face matching performance for familiar and unfamiliar faces. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5, 1–15.
Chan, J. C. K., O’Donnell, R., & Manley, K. D. (2021). Warning weakens retrieval-enhanced suggestibility only when it is given shortly after misinformation: the critical importance of timing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied (in press).
Chua, E. F., Schacter, D. L., & Sperling, R. A. (2009). Neural correlates of metamemory: A comparison of feeling-of-knowing and retrospective confidence judgments. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21, 1751–1765.
Clark, S. E., & Tunnicliff, J. L. (2001). Selecting lineup foils in eyewitness identification experiments: Experimental control and real-world simulation. Law and Human Behavior, 25, 199–216.
Cutler, B. L. (1988). Context reinstatement and eyewitness identification. In G. M. Davies & D. M. Thomson (Eds.), Memory in context: Context in memory (pp. 231–244). Wiley.
Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1989). Forensically relevant moderators of the relation between eyewitness identification accuracy and confidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 650–652.
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Dexter, H. R. (1990). Juror sensitivity to eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 185–191.
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Martens, T. K. (1987a). Improving the reliability of eyewitness identification: Putting context into context. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 629–637.
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Martens, T. K. (1987b). The reliability of eyewitness identification: The role of system and estimator variables. Law and Human Behavior, 11, 233–258.
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., O’Rourke, T. E., & Martens, T. K. (1986). Unconfounding the effects of contextual cues on eyewitness identification accuracy. Social Behaviour, 1, 113–134.
Cutler, B. L., Penrod, S. D., & Stuve, T. E. (1988). Juror decision making in eyewitness identification cases. Law and Human Behavior, 12, 41–55.
Dalton, P. (1993). The role of stimulus familiarity in context-dependent recognition. Memory & Cognition, 21, 223–234.
Davies, G. M., & Flin, R. (1984). The man behind the mask—disguise and face recognition. Human Learning, 3, 83–95.
Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2013). Four cornerstones of calibration research: Why understanding students’ judgments can improve their achievement. Learning and Instruction, 24, 58–61.
Dupuie, W. L., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Egeler, C. E., Warden, Respondent-appellee, 552 F.2d 704 (6th Cir. 1977).
Farah, M. J., Tanaka, J. W., & Drain, H. M. (1995). What causes the face inversion effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 628–634.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavioral Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). Sage.
Fitousi, D., Rotschild, N., Pnini, C., & Azizi, O. (2021). Understanding the impact of face masks on the processing of facial identity, emotion, age, and gender. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1–13.
Fleming, S. M., Massoni, S., Gajdos, T., & Vergnaud, J. C. (2016). Metacognition about the past and future: Quantifying common and distinct influences on prospective and retrospective judgments of self-performance. Neuroscience Consciousness, 2016, 1–12.
Foley, M. A., & Foley, H. J. (1998). A study of face identification: Are people looking beyond disguises? In D. L. Best & M. J. Intons-Peterson (Eds.), Memory distortions and their prevention (pp. 29–47). Erlbaum.
Freud, E., Stajduhar, A., Rosenbaum, R. S., Avidan, G., & Ganel, T. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic masks the way people perceive faces. Scientific Reports, 10, 1–8.
Gibling, F., & Davies, G. (1988). Reinstatement of context following exposure to post-event information. British Journal of Psychology, 79, 129–141.
Harris, A. M., & Aguirre, G. K. (2008). The effects of parts, wholes, and familiarity on face-selective responses in MEG. Journal of Vision, 8, 1–12.
Hockley, W. E., Hemsworth, D. H., & Consoli, A. (1999). Shades of the mirror effect: Recognition of faces with and without sunglasses. Memory & Cognition, 27, 128–138.
Hole, G. J. (1994). Configurational factors in the perception of unfamiliar faces. Perception, 23, 65–74.
Jenkins, R., White, D., Montfort, X. V., & Burton, A. M. (2011). Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition, 121, 313–323.
Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., & Chun, M. M. (1997). The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 4302–4311.
Krafka, C., & Penrod, S. (1985). Reinstatement of context in a field experiment on eyewitness identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 58–69.
Lampinen, J. M., Neuschatz, J. S., & Cling, A. D. (2012). The Psychology of Eyewitness Identification. Psychology Press.
Leder, H., & Carbon, C.-C. (2005). When context hinders! Learn–test compatibility in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 235–250.
Manley, K. D., Chan, J. C. K., & Wells, G. L. (2019). Do masked-face lineups facilitate eyewitness identification of a masked individual. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 25, 396–409.
Mansour, J. K., Beaudry, J. L., Bertrand, M. I., Kalmet, N., Melsom, E. I., & Lindsay, R. C. L. (2012). Impact of disguise on identification decisions and confidence with simultaneous and sequential lineups. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 513–526.
Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., & Mondloch, C. J. (2002). The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 255–260.
McKone, E., Martini, P., & Nakayama, K. (2006). Isolating holistic processing in faces (and perhaps objects). In G. Rhodes & M. A. Peterson (Eds.), Perception of faces, objects, and scenes: Analytics and holistic processes (pp. 92–119). Oxford University Press.
Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.
Moscovitch, M., Winocur, G., & Behrmann, M. (1997). What is special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 555–604.
Nelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When People’s Judgments of Learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “Delayed-JOL Effect.” Psychological Science, 2, 267–271.
Nguyen, T. B., Abed, E., & Pezdek, K. (2018). Postdictive confidence (but not predictive confidence) predicts eyewitness memory accuracy. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3, 1–13.
Noble, A. (2013). Ski masks, a fashion accessory to crime in D.C.: Clearly are problem, but ban not feasible. Retrieved November 28, 2017. www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/30/ski-mask-is-fashion-accessory-to-crime-in-dc/
Noyes, E., & Jenkins, R. (2019). Deliberate disguise in face identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 25, 280–290.
Olsson, N., & Juslin, P. (1999). Can self-reported encoding strategy and recognition skill be diagnostic of performance in eyewitness identifications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 42–49.
Palmer, M. A., & Brewer, N. (2012). Sequential lineup presentation promotes less-biased criterion setting but does not improve discriminability. Law and Human Behavior, 36, 247–255.
Palmer, M. A., Brewer, N., McKinnon, A. C., & Weber, N. (2010). Phenomenological reports diagnose accuracy of eyewitness identification decisions. Acta Psychologica, 133, 137–145.
Perfect, T. J. (2004). The role of self-rated ability in the accuracy of confidence judgements in eyewitness memory and general knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 157–168.
Rhodes, M. G., & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 131–148.
Richler, J. J., Mack, M. L., Gauthier, I., & Palmeri, T. J. (2009). Holistic processing of faces happens at a glance. Vision Research, 49, 2856–2861.
Righi, G., Peissig, J. J., & Tarr, M. J. (2012). Recognizing disguised faces. Visual Cognition, 20, 143–169.
Russ, A. J., Sauerland, M., Lee, C. E., & Bindemann, M. (2018). Individual differences in eyewitness accuracy across multiple lineups of faces. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3, 1–17.
Saraiva, R. B., Hope, L., Horselenberg, R., Ost, J., Sauer, J. D., & van Koppen, P. J. (2020). Using metamemory measures and memory tests to estimate eyewitness free recall performance. Memory, 28, 94–106.
Semmler, C., Dunn, J., Mickes, L., & Wixted, J. T. (2018). The role of estimator variables in eyewitness identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 24, 400–415.
Shapiro, P. N., & Penrod, S. (1986). Meta-analysis of facial identification studies. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 139–156.
Smith, S. M., & Vela, E. (2001). Environmental context-dependent memory: A review and meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 203–220.
Sommer, W., Heinz, A., Leuthold, H., Matt, J., & Schweinberger, S. R. (1995). Metamemory, distinctiveness, and event-related potentials in recognition memory for faces. Memory & Cognition, 23, 1–11.
Son, L. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2005). Judgments of learning: Evidence for a two-stage process. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1116–1129.
State v. Fierro, 489 P.2d 713, 107 Ariz. 479 (A. Z.1971).
State v. Courteau, 461 A.2d 1358 (R.I. 1983).
Tanaka, J. W., & Farah, M. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 225–245.
Tanaka, J. W., & Sengco, J. A. (1997). Features and their configuration in face recognition. Memory & Cognition, 25, 583–592.
Tanaka, J. W., & Simonyi, D. (2016). The “parts and wholes” of face recognition: A review of the literature. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 1876–1889.
Terry, R. L. (1994). Effects of facial transformations on accuracy of recognition. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 483–492.
The White House. (2021). National strategy for the COVID-19 response and pandemic preparedness. The White House, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/National-Strategy-for-the-COVID-19-Response-and-Pandemic-Preparedness.pdf.
Toseeb, U., Keeble, D. R., & Bryant, E. J. (2012). The significance of hair for face recognition. PLoS ONE, 7, 1–8.
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352–373.
Wells, G. L. (1978). Applied eyewitness-testimony research: System variables and estimator variables. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1546–1557.
Wells, G. L. (1993). What do we know about eyewitness identification. American Psychologist, 48, 553–571.
Wells, G. L., Kovera, M. B., Douglass, A. B., Brewer, N., Meissner, C. A., & Wixted, J. T. (2020). Policy and procedure recommendations for the collection and preservation of eyewitness identification evidence. Law and Human Behavior, 44, 3–36.
Wells, G. L., Lindsay, R. C., & Ferguson, T. J. (1979). Accuracy, confidence, and juror perceptions in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 440–448.
Wilford, M. M., & Wells, G. L. (2010). Does facial processing prioritize change detection? Change blindness illustrates costs & benefits of holistic processing. Psychological Science, 21, 1611–1615.
Williams v. State 395 N.E.2d 239 Supreme court of Indiana No. 1278S281 (I.N. 1979).
Wixted, J. T., & Wells, G. L. (2017). The relationship between eyewitness confidence and identification accuracy: A new synthesis. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 18, 10–65.
Yin, R. K. (1969). Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 141–145.
Young, A. W., Hellawell, D., & Hay, D. C. (1987). Configurational information in face perception. Perception, 16, 747–759.
Yovel, G., & Kanwisher, N. (2004). Face perception: Domain specific, not process specific. Neuron, 44, 889–898.