Literature DB >> 8354050

Inversion and configuration of faces.

J C Bartlett1, J Searcy.   

Abstract

If the mouth and eyes of a face are inverted, the altered construction appears grotesque when upright, but not when upside-down. Three studies of this "Thatcher illusion" employed faces that were grotesque when upright because: (a) their eyes and mouths had been inverted ("Thatcherized" faces), (b) their eyes and mouths had been moved (spatially distorted faces), or (c) they had grotesque posed expressions. Inversion reduced the apparent grotesqueness of both Thatcherized and spatially distorted faces, but not grotesque-expression faces. Moreover, Thatcherized and distorted faces, although not grotesque-expression faces, were judged as more similar to normal, smiling faces when face-pairs were inverted than when they were upright. Similarity ratings to inverted face-pairs were correlated with latencies of response to these pairs in a task that encouraged attention to components (e.g., mouths, eyes) rather than wholistic properties. Similarity ratings to upright face-pairs showed no such correlation, and this and other findings suggested that although similarity ratings to upright faces are based on wholistic information, similarity ratings to inverted faces are based largely on components. The Thatcher illusion reflects a disruption of encoding of wholistic information when faces are inverted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8354050     DOI: 10.1006/cogp.1993.1007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Psychol        ISSN: 0010-0285            Impact factor:   3.468


  76 in total

1.  Recognition memory for faces: when familiarity supports associative recognition judgments.

Authors:  A P Yonelinas; N E Kroll; I G Dobbins; M Soltani
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1999-12

Review 2.  Usage of spatial scales for the categorization of faces, objects, and scenes.

Authors:  D J Morrison; P G Schyns
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-09

3.  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

4.  A modulatory role for facial expressions in prosopagnosia.

Authors:  Beatrice de Gelder; Ilja Frissen; Jason Barton; Nouchine Hadjikhani
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-10-15       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Processing faces and facial expressions.

Authors:  Mette T Posamentier; Hervé Abdi
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 7.444

6.  Neural tuning for face wholes and parts in human fusiform gyrus revealed by FMRI adaptation.

Authors:  Alison Harris; Geoffrey Karl Aguirre
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Perceptual specialization and configural face processing in infancy.

Authors:  Nicole Zieber; Ashley Kangas; Alyson Hock; Angela Hayden; Rebecca Collins; Henrietta Bada; Jane E Joseph; Ramesh S Bhatt
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2013-08-28

8.  Sex-contingent face after-effects suggest distinct neural populations code male and female faces.

Authors:  Anthony C Little; Lisa M DeBruine; Benedict C Jones
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-11-07       Impact factor: 5.349

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.  Rotation reveals the importance of configural cues in handwritten word perception.

Authors:  Anthony S Barnhart; Stephen D Goldinger
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.