Table of ContentsIntroductionMethodParticipantsDevices and MaterialsProcedureResultsDiscussionIntroductionThe facial memory process is crucial in real-life circumstances where it is involved in the justice system and laws. Despite the sophisticated mechanism of memory, inaccuracies can still result from factors such as familiarity, attention, emotion, encoding and retrieval stages. In the eyewitness identification task of criminals, facial memory is used and considered as evidence for the accusations. Therefore, the process and biases of facial memory should be studied to reduce the chances of unfair claims. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Brown, Deffenbacher, and Sturgill (1977) invited psychology students to participate in their study and presented them with 12 pairs of photos of criminals they had encountered who had delivered testing materials to them. and innocent people in the identification phase. This was followed by the identification phase in which participants were shown with 4 lively-looking criminals and asked to identify whether they had delivered the documents and, if so, to describe the documents , to appear in photos and to indicate confidence in their judgments. The researchers found that the "photo only" group had a significantly higher level of false cues than the "line only" group, suggesting that memory confusions with previous encounters existed in the photo phase. Additionally, there were significant indictment proportions except for criminals with no photo ID, photo ID only, and lineup only, implying greater accuracy with photos seen previously. A correlation between confidence when correct and incorrect; and the description answers of the test materials at the chance level were found. Hinz and Pezdek (2001) investigated the effect of intermediate lineups on identification accuracy with a repeated distractor face (RDF). During the presentation phase, participants saw the target coat of arms. In the intermediate alignment phase, they were presented with an alignment without a target containing the RDF. During the testing phase, 3 different combinations of foil faces, target faces and RDFs were presented to the participants. They were then asked to identify the target coat of arms. The experimenters found a significantly higher hit rate of the target face when the RDF was absent, a higher false alarm rate of the RDF than the target face when the target face was absent, and a lower hit rate of the target face in the presence of both the RDF and the target face, suggesting that participants made confusing errors about the RDF and the target face and that they identified the target face based on their familiarity. The hypothesis of the present study is repeated exposure of the same face. foil faces would result in a higher incorrect identification rate in the face recognition task than re-exposure of different foil faces. It is based on the study by Brown, Deffenbacher, and Sturgill (1977) and Hinz and Pezdek (2001) that repeated presentation of foil faces decreased the accuracy of identifying the target face and decreased performance on the recognition task facial.MethodParticipantsThe participants consisted of 87 undergraduate university students recruited from HKU's PSYC2007 course in the current experiment andwhose participation was mandatory for the lecture component of the course. Gender (Male = 19 and Female = 68) had a wider distribution among females while the descriptive statistics of the sample age 18–28 were summarized (Mean = 20.31, Median = 20 , Mode = 20 and SD = 1.497).Apparatus and materialsThe visual stimuli used were photographs of 10 “most wanted” men's faces in black and white, 10 “Foil” men's faces in black and white and another new set of 10 “Foil” man faces in black and white. In the study phase of the presentation of the 10 most searched faces, the photographs were shown simultaneously and there was no time limit. In each recognition phase of the 2-day trials, the photographs were presented separately, which was different from the study phase. The equipment used was all electronic devices accessible to participants in any location. The “facial recognition” test from the experimental section of the American Psychology Association (APA) Online Psychology Lab (OPL) website was adopted to present the stimuli. Participants will need to enter their class ID to save data, launch and participate in the experiment. The collection of responses were then collected by their profile ID and experiment result ID to collect data. Procedure The independent variables to be manipulated in the present study were kinds of “aluminum” male faces presented on day 2 of the experiment. Participants were separately assigned to experience different independent variables, which refers to a portion of them being exposed to the same repeated “Foil” faces while another portion of them being exposed to the different new “Foil” faces » during day 2 compared to day 1. Two groups with various experimental conditions were included in the study design. During the second day, the control group was introduced to the new set of 10 “Foil” faces different from those on day 1 and the 10 “most wanted” faces. On the other hand, the false memory experimental group received the same set of 10 “Foil” faces on Day 1 and 10 “Most Wanted” faces. There were 39 participants in the control group and 48 participants in the false memory experimental group. The two groups had male and female genders, as well as different ages. The assignment of participants to the control group or the false memory experimental group was done by random selection. Common factors existed for participants in each group. In the learning block of the experiment, 10 “most wanted” faces were presented without time limit and simultaneously to both groups. During testing on the first day, two groups were given the same 10 “Most Wanted” faces and 10 “Foil” faces. Additionally, the instructions and the computerized task including the colors and sizes of the photographs as well as the yes/no response also remained the same. Although participants experienced some of the design in common, there were still differences. During testing on the second day, participants in both groups were given various independent variables accordingly. The control group saw the different sets of Foil faces while the false memory experimental group saw the same set of Foil faces shown in the first day's test, plus 10 "most searched for" faces. . The dependent variable measured in the test study was the difference between the d-prime results comparing the day 1 and day 2 tests. The successes and failures regarding identification respectively.