{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019319938176197836, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01622874806800618, 'mean_word_length': 5.225961538461538, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
It is more difficult to retrieve a familiar person's name and occupation from their voice than from their blurred face

Damjanovic and Hanley (2007) showed that episodic information is more readily retrieved from familiar faces than familiar voices, even when the two presentation modalities are matched for overall recognition rates by blurring the faces. This pattern of performance contrasts with the results obtained by Hanley and Turner (2000) who showed that semantic information could be recalled equally easily from familiar blurred faces and voices. The current study used the procedure developed by Hanley and Turner (2000) and applied it to the stimuli used by Damjanovic and Hanley (2007). The findings showed a marked decrease in retrieval of occupations and names from familiar voices relative to blurred faces even though the two modalities were matched for overall levels of recognition and rated familiarity. Similar results were obtained in Experiment 2 in which the same participants were asked to recognise both faces and voices. It is argued that these findings pose problems for any model of person recognition (e.g., Burton, Bruce, & Johnston, 1990) in which familiarity decisions occur beyond the point at which information from different modalities has been integrated.