Literature DB >> 24993021

Experience moderates overlap between object and face recognition, suggesting a common ability.

Isabel Gauthier1, Rankin W McGugin1, Jennifer J Richler1, Grit Herzmann2, Magen Speegle1, Ana E Van Gulick1.   

Abstract

Some research finds that face recognition is largely independent from the recognition of other objects; a specialized and innate ability to recognize faces could therefore have little or nothing to do with our ability to recognize objects. We propose a new framework in which recognition performance for any category is the product of domain-general ability and category-specific experience. In Experiment 1, we show that the overlap between face and object recognition depends on experience with objects. In 256 subjects we measured face recognition, object recognition for eight categories, and self-reported experience with these categories. Experience predicted neither face recognition nor object recognition but moderated their relationship: Face recognition performance is increasingly similar to object recognition performance with increasing object experience. If a subject has a lot of experience with objects and is found to perform poorly, they also prove to have a low ability with faces. In a follow-up survey, we explored the dimensions of experience with objects that may have contributed to self-reported experience in Experiment 1. Different dimensions of experience appear to be more salient for different categories, with general self-reports of expertise reflecting judgments of verbal knowledge about a category more than judgments of visual performance. The complexity of experience and current limitations in its measurement support the importance of aggregating across multiple categories. Our findings imply that both face and object recognition are supported by a common, domain-general ability expressed through experience with a category and best measured when accounting for experience.
© 2014 ARVO.

Keywords:  experience; individual differences; visual perception

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24993021      PMCID: PMC4528484          DOI: 10.1167/14.8.7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  32 in total

1.  Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition.

Authors:  I Gauthier; P Skudlarski; J C Gore; A W Anderson
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  The Cambridge Car Memory Test: a task matched in format to the Cambridge Face Memory Test, with norms, reliability, sex differences, dissociations from face memory, and expertise effects.

Authors:  Hugh W Dennett; Elinor McKone; Raka Tavashmi; Ashleigh Hall; Madeleine Pidcock; Mark Edwards; Bradley Duchaine
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2012-06

3.  Where cognitive development and aging meet: face learning ability peaks after age 30.

Authors:  Laura T Germine; Bradley Duchaine; Ken Nakayama
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2010-12-03

4.  Individual differences in FFA activity suggest independent processing at different spatial scales.

Authors:  Isabel Gauthier; Kim M Curby; Pawel Skudlarski; Russell A Epstein
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.282

5.  Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.

Authors:  Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 6.317

6.  Do People Have Insight Into Their Abilities? A Metasynthesis.

Authors:  Ethan Zell; Zlatan Krizan
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2014-03

7.  Face aftereffects predict individual differences in face recognition ability.

Authors:  Hugh W Dennett; Elinor McKone; Mark Edwards; Tirta Susilo
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2012-10-16

8.  Expertise Effects in Face-Selective Areas are Robust to Clutter and Diverted Attention, but not to Competition.

Authors:  Rankin Williams McGugin; Ana E Van Gulick; Benjamin J Tamber-Rosenau; David A Ross; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  Genetic variants affecting the neural processing of human facial expressions: evidence using a genome-wide functional imaging approach.

Authors:  A A Brown; J Jensen; Y S Nikolova; S Djurovic; I Agartz; A Server; R E Ferrell; S B Manuck; M Mattingsdal; I Melle; A R Hariri; A Frigessi; O A Andreassen
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 6.222

10.  Engagement of fusiform cortex and disengagement of lateral occipital cortex in the acquisition of radiological expertise.

Authors:  Erin M Harley; Whitney B Pope; J Pablo Villablanca; Jeanette Mumford; Robert Suh; John C Mazziotta; Dieter Enzmann; Stephen A Engel
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2009-03-25       Impact factor: 5.357

View more
  11 in total

1.  Differential item functioning analysis of the Vanderbilt Expertise Test for cars.

Authors:  Woo-Yeol Lee; Sun-Joo Cho; Rankin W McGugin; Ana Beth Van Gulick; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  About-face on face recognition ability and holistic processing.

Authors:  Jennifer J Richler; R Jackie Floyd; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

3.  Measuring nonvisual knowledge about object categories: The Semantic Vanderbilt Expertise Test.

Authors:  Ana E Van Gulick; Rankin W McGugin; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2016-09

4.  Individual differences in object recognition.

Authors:  Jennifer J Richler; Andrew J Tomarken; Mackenzie A Sunday; Timothy J Vickery; Kaitlin F Ryan; R Jackie Floyd; David Sheinberg; Alan C-N Wong; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Item response theory analyses of the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT).

Authors:  Sun-Joo Cho; Jeremy Wilmer; Grit Herzmann; Rankin Williams McGugin; Daniel Fiset; Ana E Van Gulick; Kaitlin F Ryan; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Psychol Assess       Date:  2015-02-02

6.  Gender differences in recognition of toy faces suggest a contribution of experience.

Authors:  Kaitlin F Ryan; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Face perception: A brief journey through recent discoveries and current directions.

Authors:  Ipek Oruc; Benjamin Balas; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2019-06-14       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Experience Shapes the Development of Neural Substrates of Face Processing in Human Ventral Temporal Cortex.

Authors:  Golijeh Golarai; Alina Liberman; Kalanit Grill-Spector
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 5.357

9.  Intracranial markers of conscious face perception in humans.

Authors:  Fabiano Baroni; Jochem van Kempen; Hiroto Kawasaki; Christopher K Kovach; Hiroyuki Oya; Matthew A Howard; Ralph Adolphs; Naotsugu Tsuchiya
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-09-04       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Cortical Morphology in Autism: Findings from a Cortical Shape-Adaptive Approach to Local Gyrification Indexing.

Authors:  Alisa R Zoltowski; Ilwoo Lyu; Michelle Failla; Lisa E Mash; Kacie Dunham; Jacob I Feldman; Tiffany G Woynaroski; Mark T Wallace; Laura A Barquero; Tin Q Nguyen; Laurie E Cutting; Hakmook Kang; Bennett A Landman; Carissa J Cascio
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 4.861

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.