Simulated automated facial recognition systems as decision-aids in forensic face matching tasks.
Daniel J. Carragher, Peter Hancock
Abstract
= 0.73-1.46). Yet, despite this improvement, AFRS-aided human performance consistently failed to reach the level that the AFRS achieved alone. Even when the AFRS erred only on the face pairs with the highest human accuracy (> 89%), participants often failed to correct the system's errors, while also overruling many correct decisions, raising questions about the conditions under which human oversight might enhance AFRS operation. Overall, these data demonstrate that the human operator is a limiting factor in this simple model of human-AFRS teaming. These findings have implications for the "human-in-the-loop" approach to AFRS oversight in forensic face matching scenarios. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).