Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test01:00

Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test

6.9K
When one or more data points appear far from the rest of the data, there is a need to determine whether they are outliers and whether they should be eliminated from the data set to ensure an accurate representation of the measured value. In many cases, outliers arise from gross errors (or human errors) and do not accurately reflect the underlying phenomenon. In some cases, however, these apparent outliers reflect true phenomenological differences. In these cases, we can use statistical methods...
6.9K
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

10.8K
Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
10.8K
Fundamental Attribution Error01:14

Fundamental Attribution Error

13.7K
According to some social psychologists, people tend to overemphasize internal factors as explanations—or attributions—for the behavior of other people. They tend to assume that the behavior of another person is a trait of that person, and to underestimate the power of the situation on the behavior of others. They tend to fail to recognize when the behavior of another is due to situational variables, and thus to the person’s state. This erroneous assumption is...
13.7K
The Sense of Self: Reflected Self-Appraisal and Social Comparison02:57

The Sense of Self: Reflected Self-Appraisal and Social Comparison

55.5K
According to Charles Cooley, we base our image on what we think other people see (Cooley 1902). We imagine how we must appear to others, then react to this speculation. We don certain clothes, prepare our hair in a particular manner, wear makeup, use cologne, and the like—all with the notion that our presentation of ourselves is going to affect how others perceive us. We expect a certain reaction, and, if lucky, we get the one we desire and feel good about it. But more than that, Cooley...
55.5K
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

9.9K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
9.9K
Random Error01:04

Random Error

9.1K
Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...
9.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Human detection of AI-generated faces and voices is not domain-general.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Paradoxical inhibition of autonomic output following cortical suppression: When inhibiting an inhibitor results in more (not less) inhibition.

Neuropsychologia·2026
Same author

Posttraumatic stress disorder and susceptibility to misinformation for an analogue trauma event.

Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy·2025
Same author

Eyewitness suspect identification: six claims regarding the state of the science.

Memory (Hove, England)·2025
Same author

Error rates for high confidence eyewitness identifications.

Memory (Hove, England)·2025
Same author

Mitigating the harms of manipulated media: Confronting deepfakes and digital deception.

PNAS nexus·2025
Same journal

Low prevalence targets are primarily missed due to mind wandering.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same journal

An introduction to the special issue celebrating Mary A. Peterson.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same journal

Properties of the threshold stimulus exposure duration (TSED) measure of visual search efficiency.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same journal

Auditory selective attention in depth: Investigating directional dependency across front, lateral, and rear spaces.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same journal

Dissociations between stereoacuity and visual acuity with binocular night vision goggles.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same journal

Reward-based prioritization and perceptual feature effects on attentional flexibility in working memory.

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing
10:36

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

12.6K

Can people detect errors in shadows and reflections?

Sophie J Nightingale1, Kimberley A Wade2, Hany Farid3

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK. Snightingale@berkeley.edu.

Attention, Perception & Psychophysics
|June 30, 2019
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

People struggle to detect doctored images, even when using visual cues like shadows and reflections. Detection improves with larger manipulations, but remains generally poor, highlighting a gap in image authenticity assessment.

Keywords:
Digital image forensicsHuman perceptionImage manipulationVisual processing

More Related Videos

Biomolecular Detection employing the Interferometric Reflectance Imaging Sensor IRIS
11:04

Biomolecular Detection employing the Interferometric Reflectance Imaging Sensor IRIS

Published on: May 3, 2011

15.1K
Single Wavelength Shadow Imaging of Caenorhabditis elegans Locomotion Including Force Estimates
08:41

Single Wavelength Shadow Imaging of Caenorhabditis elegans Locomotion Including Force Estimates

Published on: April 18, 2014

9.6K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing
10:36

Rare Event Detection Using Error-corrected DNA and RNA Sequencing

Published on: August 3, 2018

12.6K
Biomolecular Detection employing the Interferometric Reflectance Imaging Sensor IRIS
11:04

Biomolecular Detection employing the Interferometric Reflectance Imaging Sensor IRIS

Published on: May 3, 2011

15.1K
Single Wavelength Shadow Imaging of Caenorhabditis elegans Locomotion Including Force Estimates
08:41

Single Wavelength Shadow Imaging of Caenorhabditis elegans Locomotion Including Force Estimates

Published on: April 18, 2014

9.6K

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive psychology
  • Computer vision
  • Digital forensics

Background:

  • Sophisticated photo-editing software enables widespread creation of manipulated images.
  • Limited human ability to detect image forgeries poses significant societal risks.
  • Prevalence of fake imagery across media and online platforms necessitates robust detection methods.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the efficacy of using shadow and reflection cues for detecting image manipulations.
  • To determine if individuals can identify doctored images by analyzing inconsistencies in light and reflections.
  • To explore the psychological underpinnings of poor detection rates in image authenticity.

Main Methods:

  • Conducted seven experiments involving participants assessing image authenticity.
  • Focused on participants' use of shadow and reflection information as detection cues.
  • Varied the size and nature of image manipulations across experimental conditions.

Main Results:

  • Detection rates for manipulated images improved as the size of the manipulation increased.
  • Overall accuracy in identifying authentic versus doctored images remained low across participants.
  • Participants demonstrated limited utilization of shadow and reflection cues for authenticity judgments.

Conclusions:

  • Individuals do not readily employ shadow and reflection cues to discern image authenticity.
  • Poor detection may stem from incomplete visual encoding of scene details.
  • Future research could explore training methods to enhance the use of these visual cues for forgery detection.