Configural information is processed differently in perception and recognition of faces

Vision Research

Volumn 43, Issue 14, 2003, Pages 1501-1505

  Schwaninger, Adrian ^a,b   Ryf, Stefan ^b   Hofer, Franziska ^b  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL CYBERNETICS   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Configural encoding; Face perception; Face recognition; Horizontal vertical illusion; Perceptual illusion

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EYE; FACE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MOUTH; NORMAL HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECOGNITION; VISUAL ORIENTATION;

EID: 0038054133     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0042-6989(03)00171-8     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bruce V., Doyle T., Dench N., Burton M. Remembering facial configurations. Cognition. 38:1991;109-144.
2. Coren S., Girgus J.S. Seeing is deceiving: The psychology of visual illusions. 1978;Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
3. Fick A. De errore quodam optico asymemtria bulbi effecto. 1851;J.A. Kochii, Marburg.
4. Greenhouse S.W., Geisser S. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika. 32:1959;95-112.
5. Haig N.D. The effect of feature displacement on face recognition. Perception. 13:1984;505-512.
6. Higashiyama A. Horizontal and vertical distance perception: The discorded-orientation theory. Perception & Psychophysics. 58:1996;259-270.
7. Hosie J.A., Ellis H.D., Haig N.D. The effect of feature displacement on the perception of well-known faces. Perception. 17:1988;461-474.
8. Kemp R., McManus C., Pigott T. Sensitivity to the displacement of facial features in negative and inverted images. Perception. 19:1990;531-543.
9. Leder H., Bruce V. When inverted faces are recognized: the role of configural information in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A - Human Experimental Psychology. 53:2000;513-536.
10. Mauchly J.W. Significance test for sphericity of a normal. n -variate distribution Annals of Mathematical Statistics. 11:1940;204-210.
11. Murray J.E., Yong E., Rhodes G. Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces. Psychological Science. 11:2000;492-496.
12. Rhodes G., Brake S., Atkinson A.P. What's lost in inverted faces? Cognition. 47:1993;25-57.
13. Schwaninger A., Mast F. Why is face recognition so orientation-sensitive? Psychophysical evidence for an integrative model. Perception. 28(Suppl.):1999;116.
14. Searcy J.H., Bartlett J.C. Inversion and processing of components and spatial relational information in faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 22:1996;904-915.
15. Sergent J. An investigation into component and configurational processes underlying face recognition. British Journal of Psychology. 75:1984;221-242.
16. Yang T.L., Dixon M.W., Proffitt D.R. Seeing big things: Overestimation of heights is greater for real objects than for objects in pictures. Perception. 28:1999;445-467.
17. Young A.W., Hellawell D., Hay D.C. Configural information in face perception. Perception. 16:1987;747-759.
18. Yin R.K. Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 81:1969;141-145.