Abstract
This article provides a brief overview of the journal article by Elizabeth Simpson and colleagues. In their study, they tested his efficiency of human face recognition about animals. Their primary goal was to establish whether same species received more allocation of attention. Their results indicated that human faces are more identifiable than those of other species. The study stands in sharp contrast to previous studies that had indicated that animal faces registered a higher recognition amongst animals than human faces did among humans. This paper also outlines the strengths and weaknesses of the study by Simpson and colleagues. Perhaps one of the most notable strength relates to credibility while the biggest weakness is the use of highly specialized language (jargon) and scientific terms that would render the layman reader “lost.” Overall, the paper presents a coherent study that may be important for subsequent future research in the area of facial recognition technologies.
In their article, Elizabeth Simpson and colleagues tested the efficiency of human face search by checking whether there exists a broad detection window for face-like stimuli in human and animal faces or whether same species get more attentional allocation (Simpson et al., 2175). These researchers evaluated the strength of the bias for own species face detection.
The article by Simpson et al. has various strengths as well as weaknesses. Perhaps the greatest strength of this article is its methodology. The study relies on an advanced machine, the Tobii T120XL to track corneal movement (Simpson et al., 2177). This tracking methodology adds credibility to the study because it eliminates human bias. There is no room for interpretation or provision of views and perspectives. The machine provides absolute results that can only be challenged to the degree of the machine’s inaccuracy, which is extremely low. Another source of strength of this study is the use of reliable primary sources as underpinning evidence. The researchers rely on the theories and findings of other credible researchers as underpinning literature for this study. This approach does not only earn this research a high degree of credibility, but it also places it in good stead for use in subsequent research in this area.The third strength of the research is that it relies on empirical evidence to underpin the claims that its authors make. The empirical evidence provides a good basis for a logical argument for the claims made. The evidence also earns credibility for the study and eliminates doubts. One of the weaknesses of this research, however, is the use of highly specialized language (jargon) and scientific terms that would render the layman reader “lost.” However, this study has a well-defined target audience that will find the material particularly useful.
Work Cited
Simpson, Elizabeth A. et al. "Finding Faces Among Faces: Human Faces Are Located More Quickly And Accurately Than Other Primate And Mammal Faces". Atten Percept Psychophys 76.8 (2014): 2175-2183. Web.
