Literature DB >> 6733396

An investigation into component and configural processes underlying face perception.

J Sergent.   

Abstract

The nature of the processes underlying face perception was examined in two different paradigms using the same set of stimuli varying on three dimensions of two values each. In a simultaneous matching task, both latencies and errors were found to decrease as the number of differences between stimuli increased. Regression analyses showed that the manipulated features interactively contributed to these variations when the faces were presented in their normal upright orientation, whereas no evidence of an interactive processing was found when the faces were inverted. A multidimensional scaling analysis of dissimilarity judgements between pairs of different upright faces revealed that the overall impression of a face was not simply the sum of subimpressions, and that a configuration typical of each face emerged from the relationship among their particular features, giving each face its individuality. The results suggest that faces have both component and configural properties and lend themselves to different processing strategies that are not mutually exclusive and can unfold simultaneously. Some implications of these results for current research on face perception and recognition are outlined.

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6733396     DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1984.tb01895.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Psychol        ISSN: 0007-1269


  62 in total

1.  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

2.  Perceptual integrality of componential and configural information in faces.

Authors:  Rama Amishav; Ruth Kimchi
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-10

Review 3.  Face perception: an integrative review of the role of spatial frequencies.

Authors:  Marcos Ruiz-Soler; Francesc S Beltran
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-08-02

4.  The inversion effect on gaze perception reflects processing of component information.

Authors:  Adrian Schwaninger; Janek S Lobmaier; Martin H Fischer
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-10-29       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Unfamiliar faces are not faces: evidence from a matching task.

Authors:  Ahmed M Megreya; A Mike Burton
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2006-06

6.  Lateralised processing of the internal and the external facial features of personally familiar and unfamiliar faces: a visual half-field study.

Authors:  Edward H F De Haan; Evelien N M van Kollenburg
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2005-08-11

7.  Viewpoint invariance in the discrimination of upright and inverted faces.

Authors:  Alissa Wright; Jason J S Barton
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2008-10-04       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  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

9.  The perception of a familiar face is no more than the sum of its parts.

Authors:  Jason M Gold; Jarrett D Barker; Shawn Barr; Jennifer L Bittner; Alexander Bratch; W Drew Bromfield; Roy A Goode; Mary Jones; Doori Lee; Aparna Srinath
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2014-12

10.  Are Faces Special to Infants? An Investigation of Configural and Featural Processing for the Upper and Lower Regions of Houses in 3- to 7-month-olds.

Authors:  Paul C Quinn; James W Tanaka; Kang Lee; Olivier Pascalis; Alan M Slater
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2013-01-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.