Literature DB >> 8316637

Parts and wholes in face recognition.

J W Tanaka1, M J Farah.   

Abstract

Are faces recognized using more holistic representations than other types of stimuli? Taking holistic representation to mean representation without an internal part structure, we interpret the available evidence on this issue and then design new empirical tests. Based on previous research, we reasoned that if a portion of an object corresponds to an explicitly represented part in a hierarchical visual representation, then when that portion is presented in isolation it will be identified relatively more easily than if it did not have the status of an explicitly represented part. The hypothesis that face recognition is holistic therefore predicts that a part of a face will be disproportionately more easily recognized in the whole face than as an isolated part, relative to recognition of the parts and wholes of other kinds of stimuli. This prediction was borne out in three experiments: subjects were more accurate at identifying the parts of faces, presented in the whole object, than they were at identifying the same part presented in isolation, even though both parts and wholes were tested in a forced-choice format and the whole faces differed only by one part. In contrast, three other types of stimuli--scrambled faces, inverted faces, and houses--did not show this advantage for part identification in whole object recognition.

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8316637     DOI: 10.1080/14640749308401045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A        ISSN: 0272-4987


  392 in total

1.  The role of movement in the recognition of famous faces.

Authors:  K Lander; F Christie; V Bruce
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-11

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.  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

5.  Resolution of spatial and temporal visual attention in infants with fragile X syndrome.

Authors:  Faraz Farzin; Susan M Rivera; David Whitney
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 13.501

6.  Visual kin recognition in nonhuman primates: (Pan troglodytes and Macaca mulatta): inbreeding avoidance or male distinctiveness?

Authors:  Lisa A Parr; Matthew Heintz; Elizabeth Lonsdorf; Emily Wroblewski
Journal:  J Comp Psychol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.231

7.  Working memory templates are maintained as feature-specific perceptual codes.

Authors:  Kartik K Sreenivasan; Deepak Sambhara; Amishi P Jha
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-04-20       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  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

9.  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

10.  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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.