Literature DB >> 2940312

Why faces are and are not special: an effect of expertise.

R Diamond, S Carey.   

Abstract

Recognition memory for faces is hampered much more by inverted presentation than is memory for any other material so far examined. The present study demonstrates that faces are not unique with regard to this vulnerability to inversion. The experiments also attempt to isolate the source of the inversion effect. In one experiment, use of stimuli (landscapes) in which spatial relations among elements are potentially important distinguishing features is shown not to guarantee a large inversion effect. Two additional experiments show that for dog experts sufficiently knowledgeable to individuate dogs of the same breed, memory for photographs of dogs of that breed is as disrupted by inversion as is face recognition. A final experiment indicates that the effect of orientation on memory for faces does not depend on inability to identify single features of these stimuli upside down. These experiments are consistent with the view that experts represent items in memory in terms of distinguishing features of a different kind than do novices. Speculations as to the type of feature used and neuropsychological and developmental implications of this accomplishment are offered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 2940312     DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.115.2.107

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  289 in total

1.  The influence of retrieval processes in verbal overshadowing.

Authors:  C A Meissner; J C Brigham; C M Kelley
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-01

2.  Spatial frequencies in short-term memory for faces: a test of three frequency-dependent hypotheses.

Authors:  M J Wenger; J T Townsend
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2000-01

3.  Figural aftereffects in the perception of faces.

Authors:  M A Webster; O H MacLin
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-12

4.  The Noh mask effect: vertical viewpoint dependence of facial expression perception.

Authors:  M J Lyons; R Campbell; A Plante; M Coleman; M Kamachi; S Akamatsu
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2000-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Impact of varying levels of expertise on decisions of category typicality.

Authors:  K E Johnson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-10

6.  Memory for faces, shoes, and objects by deaf and hearing signers and hearing nonsigners.

Authors:  P Arnold; M Mills
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2001-03

7.  Age differences in accuracy and choosing in eyewitness identification and face recognition.

Authors:  J H Searcy; J C Bartlett; A Memon
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-05

8.  Beauty is in the ease of the beholding: a neurophysiological test of the averageness theory of facial attractiveness.

Authors:  Logan T Trujillo; Jessica M Jankowitsch; Judith H Langlois
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.282

9.  Becoming a Lunari or Taiyo expert: learned attention to parts drives holistic processing of faces.

Authors:  Kao-Wei Chua; Jennifer J Richler; Isabel Gauthier
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2014-03-03       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Allocentric kin recognition is not affected by facial inversion.

Authors:  Maria F Dal Martello; Lisa M DeBruine; Laurence T Maloney
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.