High familiar faces have both eye recognition and holistic processing advantages.
Eye processing
Face recognition
Familiarity
Holistic processing
Part-based processing
Journal
Attention, perception & psychophysics
ISSN: 1943-393X
Titre abrégé: Atten Percept Psychophys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101495384
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Oct 2023
Historique:
accepted:
12
09
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
5
10
2023
entrez:
4
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
People recognize familiar faces better than unfamiliar faces. However, it remains unknown whether familiarity affects part-based and/or holistic processing. Wang et al., Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 559 (2015), Vision Research, 157, 89-96 (2019) found both enhanced part-based and holistic processing in eye relative to mouth regions (i.e., in a region-selective manner) for own-race and own-species faces, i.e., faces with more experience. Here, we examined the role of face familiarity in eyes (part-based, region-selective) and holistic processing. Face familiarity was tested at three levels: high-familiar (faces of students from the same department and the same class who attended almost all courses together), low-familiar (faces of students from the same department but different classes who attended some courses together), and unfamiliar (faces of schoolmates from different departments who seldom attended the same courses). Using the old/new task in Experiment 1, we found that participants recognized eyes of high-familiar faces better than low-familiar and unfamiliar ones, while similar performance was observed for mouths, indicating a region-selective, eyes familiarity effect. Using the "Perceptual field" paradigm in Experiment 2, we observed a stronger inversion effect for high-familiar faces, a weaker inversion effect for low-familiar faces, but a non-significant inversion effect for unfamiliar faces, indicating that face familiarity plays a role in holistic processing. Taken together, our results suggest that familiarity, like other experience-based variables (e.g., race and species), can improve both eye processing and holistic processing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37794299
doi: 10.3758/s13414-023-02792-4
pii: 10.3758/s13414-023-02792-4
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2296-2306Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 31100737
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 31371032
Organisme : Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province
ID : LY19C090006
Organisme : Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province
ID : LY20C090010
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.
Références
Bacci, N., Houlton, T. M. R., Briers, N., & Steyn, M. (2021). Validation of forensic facial comparison by morphological analysis in photographic and CCTV samples. International Journal of Legal Medicine, 135(5), 1965–1981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-021-02512-3
doi: 10.1007/s00414-021-02512-3
pubmed: 33594456
Bortolon, C., Lorieux, S., & Raffard, S. (2018). Self- or familiar-face recognition advantage? New insight using ambient images. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(6), 1396–1404. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1327982
doi: 10.1080/17470218.2017.1327982
Brooks, K. R., & Kemp, R. I. (2007). Sensitivity to feature displacement in familiar and unfamiliar faces: Beyond the internal/external feature distinction. Perception, 36(11), 1646–1659. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5675
doi: 10.1068/p5675
pubmed: 18265845
Bruce, V., Henderson, Z., Newman, C., & Burton, A. M. (2001). Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7(3), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.207
doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.7.3.207
pubmed: 11676099
Burton, A. M., & Jenkins, R. (2012). Unfamiliar Face Perception. In G. Rhodes, A. Calder, M. Johnson, & J. V. Haxby (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Face Perception. Oxford University Press.
Burton, A. M., Schweinberger, S. R., Jenkins, R., & Kaufmann, J. M. (2015). Arguments Against a Configural Processing Account of Familiar Face Recognition. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(4), 482–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615583129
doi: 10.1177/1745691615583129
pubmed: 26177949
Caharel, S., & Rossion, B. (2021). The N170 is Sensitive to Long-term (Personal) Familiarity of a Face Identity. Neuroscience, 458, 244–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2020.12.036
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2020.12.036
pubmed: 33460730
Caharel, S., Fiori, N., Bernard, C., Lalonde, R., & Rebaï, M. (2006). The effects of inversion and eye displacements of familiar and unknown faces on early and late-stage ERPs. International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology, 62(1), 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.03.002
doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.03.002
pubmed: 16678927
Crookes, K., Favelle, S., Hayward, W. G. (2013). Holistic Processing for Other-Race Faces in Chinese Participants Occurs for Upright but Not Inverted Faces. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00029
Davis, J. P., & Valentine, T. (2009). CCTV on trial: Matching video images with the defendant in the dock. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(4), 482–505. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1490
doi: 10.1002/acp.1490
DeGutis, J., Wilmer, J., Mercado, R. J., & Cohan, S. (2013). Using regression to measure holistic face processing reveals a strong link with face recognition ability. Cognition, 126(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.09.004
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.09.004
pubmed: 23084178
Ellis, H. D., Shepherd, J. W., & Davies, G. M. (1979). Identification of familiar and unfamiliar faces from internal and external features: Some implications for theories of face recognition. Perception, 8(4), 431–439. https://doi.org/10.1068/p080431
doi: 10.1068/p080431
pubmed: 503774
Fitousi, D. (2020). Decomposing the composite face effect: Evidence for non-holistic processing based on the ex-Gaussian distribution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(6), 819–840. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021820904222
doi: 10.1177/1747021820904222
Ge, L., Anzures, G., Wang, Z., Kelly, D. J., Pascalis, O., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Yang, Z., & Lee, K. (2008). An inner face advantage in children’s recognition of familiar peers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 101(2), 124–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.05.006
doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2008.05.006
pubmed: 18639888
pmcid: 2576737
Goffaux, V., & Rossion, B. (2006). Faces are ‘spatial’—Holistic face perception is supported by low spatial frequencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(4), 1023–1039. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.4.1023
doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.4.1023
pubmed: 16846295
Gosling, A., & Eimer, M. (2011). An event-related brain potential study of explicit face recognition. Neuropsychologia, 49(9), 2736–2745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.05.025
doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.05.025
pubmed: 21679721
Heisz, J. J., & Shore, D. I. (2008). More efficient scanning for familiar faces. Journal of Vision, 8(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1167/8.1.9
doi: 10.1167/8.1.9
Herzmann, G., Schweinberger, S. R., Sommer, W., & Jentzsch, I. (2004). What’s special about personally familiar faces? A multimodal approach. Psychophysiology, 41(5), 688–701. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2004.00196.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2004.00196.x
pubmed: 15318875
Hill, H., & Bruce, V. (1996). The effects of lighting on the perception of facial surfaces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(4), 986–1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.22.4.986
doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.22.4.986
pubmed: 8756964
Huang, W., Wu, X., Hu, L., Wang, L., Ding, Y., & Qu, Z. (2017). Revisiting the earliest electrophysiological correlate of familiar face recognition. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 120, 42–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.07.001
doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.07.001
pubmed: 28684327
Jenkins, R., & Burton, A. M. (2011). Stable face representations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 366(1571), 1671–1683. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2010.0379
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0379
Jenkins, R., White, D., Van Montfort, X., & Mike Burton, A. (2011). Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition, 121(3), 313–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001
pubmed: 21890124
Keyes, H., & Zalicks, C. (2016). Socially Important Faces Are Processed Preferentially to Other Familiar and Unfamiliar Faces in a Priming Task across a Range of Viewpoints. PLOS ONE, 11(5), e0156350. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156350
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0156350
pubmed: 27219101
pmcid: 4878734
Kramer, R. S. S., Manesi, Z., Towler, A., Reynolds, M. G., & Burton, A. M. (2018). Familiarity and Within-Person Facial Variability: The Importance of the Internal and External Features. Perception, 47(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006617725242
doi: 10.1177/0301006617725242
pubmed: 28803526
Kuefner, D., Macchi Cassia, V., Picozzi, M., & Bricolo, E. (2008). Do all kids look alike? Evidence for an other-age effect in adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(4), 811–817. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.34.4.811
doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.4.811
pubmed: 18665727
Loftus, G. R., Oberg, M. A., & Dillon, A. M. (2004). Linear theory, dimensional theory, and the face-inversion effect. Psychological Review, 111(4), 835–863.
doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.835
pubmed: 15482064
Marzi, T., & Viggiano, M. P. (2007). Interplay between familiarity and orientation in face processing: An ERP study. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 65(3), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.04.003
doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.04.003
pubmed: 17512996
McKone, E., Brewer, J. L., MacPherson, S., Rhodes, G., & Hayward, W. G. (2007). Familiar Other-Race Faces Show Normal Holistic Processing and are Robust to Perceptual Stress. Perception, 36(2), 224–248. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5499
doi: 10.1068/p5499
pubmed: 17402665
Michel, C., Caldara, R., & Rossion, B. (2006). Same-race faces are perceived more holistically than other-race faces. Visual Cognition, 14(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506280500158761
doi: 10.1080/13506280500158761
Michel, C., Rossion, B., Han, J., Chung, C.-S., & Caldara, R. (2006). Holistic Processing Is Finely Tuned for Faces of One’s Own Race. Psychological Science, 17(7), 608–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01752.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01752.x
pubmed: 16866747
Miyakoshi, M., Kanayama, N., Nomura, M., Iidaka, T., & Ohira, H. (2008). ERP study of viewpoint-independence in familiar-face recognition. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 69(2), 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.03.009
doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.03.009
pubmed: 18474403
Mondloch, C. J., Elms, N., Maurer, D., Rhodes, G., Hayward, W. G., Tanaka, J. W., & Zhou, G. (2010). Processes underlying the cross-race effect: An investigation of holistic, featural, and relational processing of own-race versus other-race faces. Perception, 39(8), 1065–1085. https://doi.org/10.1068/p6608
doi: 10.1068/p6608
pubmed: 20942358
Nemrodov, D., Anderson, T., Preston, F. F., & Itier, R. J. (2014). Early sensitivity for eyes within faces: A new neuronal account of holistic and featural processing. NeuroImage, 97, 81–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.04.042
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.04.042
pubmed: 24768932
O’Donnell, C., & Bruce, V. (2001). Familiarisation with Faces Selectively Enhances Sensitivity to Changes Made to the Eyes. Perception, 30(6), 755–764. https://doi.org/10.1068/p3027
doi: 10.1068/p3027
pubmed: 11464563
O’toole, A. J., Edelman, S., & Bülthoff, H. H. (1998). Stimulus-specific effects in face recognition over changes in viewpoint. Vision Research, 38(15–16), 2351–2363. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00042-X
doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(98)00042-X
pubmed: 9798004
Osborne, C. D., & Stevenage, S. V. (2013). Familiarity and face processing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(1), 108–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.699077
doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.699077
Parkington, K. B., & Itier, R. J. (2019). From eye to face: The impact of face outline, feature number, and feature saliency on the early neural response to faces. Brain Research, 1722, 146343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2019.146343
doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2019.146343
pubmed: 31336099
Patterson, K. E., & Baddeley, A. D. (1977). When face recognition fails. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 3(4), 406–417. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.3.4.406
doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.3.4.406
pubmed: 864389
Quinn, B. P., Wiese, H. (2022). The role of the eye region for familiar face recognition: Evidence from spatial low-pass filtering and contrast negation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 174702182210859. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218221085990
Ramon, M., & Gobbini, M. I. (2018). Familiarity matters: A review on prioritized processing of personally familiar faces. Visual Cognition, 26(3), 179–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2017.1405134
doi: 10.1080/13506285.2017.1405134
Rhodes, G., Hayward, W. G., & Winkler, C. (2006). Expert face coding: Configural and component coding of own-race and other-race faces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(3), 499–505. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193876
doi: 10.3758/BF03193876
Roberts, T., & Bruce, V. (1988). Feature Saliency in Judging the Sex and Familiarity of Faces. Perception, 17(4), 475–481. https://doi.org/10.1068/p170475
doi: 10.1068/p170475
pubmed: 3244520
Royer, J., Blais, C., Charbonneau, I., Déry, K., Tardif, J., Duchaine, B., Gosselin, F., & Fiset, D. (2018). Greater reliance on the eye region predicts better face recognition ability. Cognition, 181, 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.004
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.004
pubmed: 30103033
Tanaka, J. W., Kiefer, M., & Bukach, C. M. (2004). A holistic account of the own-race effect in face recognition: Evidence from a cross-cultural study. Cognition, 93(1), B1–B9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.011
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.09.011
pubmed: 15110726
Van Belle, G., Lefèvre, P., & Rossion, B. (2015). Face inversion and acquired prosopagnosia reduce the size of the perceptual field of view. Cognition, 136, 403–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.037
doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.037
pubmed: 25557618
Vinette, C., Gosselin, F., & Schyns, P. G. (2004). Spatio-temporal dynamics of face recognition in a flash: It’s in the eyes. Cognitive Science, 28(2), 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2802_8
doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2802_8
Visconti di Oleggio Castello, M., Wheeler, K. G., Cipolli, C., & Gobbini, M. I. (2017). Familiarity facilitates feature-based face processing. PLOS ONE, 12(6), e0178895. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178895
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178895
pubmed: 28582439
pmcid: 5459439
Wang, R., Li, J., Fang, H., Tian, M., & Liu, J. (2012). Individual Differences in Holistic Processing Predict Face Recognition Ability. Psychological Science, 23(2), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611420575
doi: 10.1177/0956797611420575
pubmed: 22222218
Wang, Z., Quinn, P. C., Tanaka, J. W., Yu, X., Sun, Y.-H. P., Liu, J., Pascalis, O., Ge, L., Lee, K. (2015). An other-race effect for configural and featural processing of faces: Upper and lower face regions play different roles. Frontiers in Psychology, (06). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00559
Wang, Z., Quinn, P. C., Jin, H., Sun, Y.-H.P., Tanaka, J. W., Pascalis, O., & Lee, K. (2019). A regional composite-face effect for species-specific recognition: Upper and lower halves play different roles in holistic processing of monkey faces. Vision Research, 157, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2018.03.004
doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2018.03.004
pubmed: 29653136
Wang, Z., Ni, H., Zhou, X., Yang, X., Zheng, Z., Sun, Y.-H.P., Zhang, X., & Jin, H. (2023). Looking at the upper facial half enlarges the range of holistic face processing. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 2419. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-29583-z
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-29583-z
pubmed: 36765162
pmcid: 9918552
Yan, X., Young, A. W., & Andrews, T. J. (2017). The automaticity of face perception is influenced by familiarity. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(7), 2202–2211. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1362-1
doi: 10.3758/s13414-017-1362-1
Yarmey, A. D. (1971). Recognition memory for familiar “public” faces: Effects of orientation and delay. Psychonomic Science, 24(6), 286–288. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03329007
doi: 10.3758/BF03329007