{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02027027027027027, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0013513513513513514, 'mean_word_length': 5.7318181818181815, '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}}
Not looking yourself: The cost of self-selecting photographs for identity verification.

Photo-identification is based on the premise that photographs are representative of facial appearance. However, previous studies show that ratings of likeness vary across different photographs of the same face, suggesting that some images capture identity better than others. Two experiments were designed to examine the relationship between likeness judgments and face matching accuracy. In Experiment 1, we compared unfamiliar face matching accuracy for self-selected and other-selected high-likeness images. Surprisingly, images selected by previously unfamiliar viewers - after very limited exposure to a target face - were more accurately matched than self-selected images chosen by the target identity themselves. Results also revealed extremely low inter-rater agreement in ratings of likeness across participants, suggesting that perceptions of image resemblance are inherently unstable. In Experiment 2, we test whether the cost of self-selection can be explained by this general disagreement in likeness judgments between individual raters. We find that averaging across rankings by multiple raters produces image selections that provide superior identification accuracy. However, benefit of other-selection persisted for single raters, suggesting that inaccurate representations of self interfere with our ability to judge which images faithfully represent our current appearance.