Turning configural processing upside down: Part and whole body postures

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 73-87

  Reed, Catherine L ^a   Stone, Valerie E ^b   Grubb, Jefferson D ^a   McGoldrick, John E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DENVER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Body inversion effect; Body schema; Configural processing; Face inversion effect; Object recognition

Indexed keywords

ART; ARTICLE; BODY POSTURE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FACE; HUMAN; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOPHYSICS;

DEPTH PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FACE; HUMAN BODY; HUMANS; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; POSTURE; PSYCHOPHYSICS;

EID: 33244484795     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.73     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Baenninger, M. (1994). The development of face recognition: Featural or configural processing? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 57, 377-396.
2. Bartlett, J. C., & Searcy, J. (1993). Inversion and configuration of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 473-497.
3. Barton, J. J., Keenan, J. P., & Bass, T. (2001). Discrimination of spatial relations and features in faces: Effects of inversion and viewing duration. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 527-549.
4. Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
5. Boutsen, L., & Humphreys, G. W. (2003). The effect of inversion on the encoding of normal and "Thatcherized" faces. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human and Experimental Psychology, 56(A), 955-975.
6. Buxbaum, L., & Coslett, H. B. (2001). Specialized structural descriptions for human body parts: Evidence from autotopagnosia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 18, 289-306.
7. Carey, S. (1992). Becoming a face expert. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 335, 95-103.
8. Carey, S., & Diamond, R. (1994). Are faces perceived as configurations more by adults than by children? Visual Cognition, 1, 253-274.
9. Cave, C. B., & Kosslyn, S. M. (1993). The role of parts and spatial relations in object identification. Perception, 22, 229-248.
10. Chambers, K. W., McBeath, M. K., & Schiano, D. (1999). Tops are more salient than bottoms: Viewers preferentially attend to the tops of figures. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 625-635.
11. Collishaw, S. M., & Hole, G. J. (2000). Featural and configurational processes in the recognition of faces of different familiarity. Perception, 29, 893-909.
12. Diamond, R., & Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 107-117.
13. Donnelly, N., Humphreys, G. W., & Sawyer, J. (1994). Stimulus factors affecting the categorisation of faces and scrambled faces. Acta Psychologia, 85, 219-234.
14. Farah, M. J. (1991). Patterns of co-occurrence among the associative agnosias: Implications for visual object representation. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 8, 313-334.
15. Farah, M. J., Tanaka, J. W., & Drain, H. M. (1995). What causes the face inversion effect? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 628-634.
16. Farah, M. J., Wilson, K. D., Drain, H. M., & Tanaka, J. R. (1998). The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms. Vision Resolution, 35, 2089-2093.
17. Friere, A., Lee, K., & Symons, L. (2000). The face inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: Direct evidence. Perception, 29, 159-170.
18. Gauthier, I., & Tarr, M. J. (2002). Unraveling mechanisms for expert object recognition: Bridging brain activity and behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 431-446.
19. Gauthier, I., Williams, P., Tarr, M. J., & Tanaka, J. (1998). Training "Greeble" experts: A framework for studying expert object recognition processes. Vision Research, 38, 2401-2428.
20. Haig, N. D. (1984). The effect of feature displacement on face recognition. Perception, 13, 505-512.
21. Hole, G. (1994). Configurational factors in the perception of unfamiliar faces. Perception, 23, 65-74.
22. Kanwisher, N., Tong, F., & Nakayama, K. (1998). The effect of face inversion on the human fusiform face area. Cognition, 68, B1-B11.
23. Kourtzi, Z., & Kanwisher, N. (2000). Activation in human MT/MST by static images with implied motion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 48-55.
24. Leder, H., & Bruce, V. (1998). Local and relational aspects of face distinctiveness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 51(A), 449-473.
25. Leder, H., & Bruce, V. (2000). When inverted faces are recognized: The role of configural information in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 53(A), 513-536.
26. Leder, H., Candrian, G., Huber, O., & Bruce, V. (2001). Configural features in the context of upright and inverted faces. Perception, 30, 73-83.
27. Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (1991). Detection theory: A user's guide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
28. Marr, D. (1982). Vision. San Francisco: Freeman.
29. Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., & Mondloch, C. J. (2002). The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 255-260.
30. McGoldrick, J. E. (2003). The configural processing of human body postures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Denver, Colorado.
31. McGoldrick, J. E., & Reed, C. L. (2005). Differences in the holistic processing of body postures and faces. Manuscript submitted for publication.
32. Moscovitch, M., Winocur, G., & Behrmann, M. (1997). What is special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 555-604.
33. Ogden, J. A. (1995). Autotopagnosia. Occurrence in a patient without nominal aphasia and with an intact ability to point to parts of animals and objects. Brain, 108, 1009-1022.
34. Parsons, L. M. (1987a). Imagined spatial transformation of one's body. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 172-191.
35. Parsons, L. M. (1987b). Imagined spatial transformation of one's hands and feet. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 178-241.
36. Perrett, D. I., Qram, M. W., & Ashbridge, E. (1998). Evidence accumulation in cell populations responsive to faces: An account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations. Cognition, 67, 111-145.
37. Rakover, S. S., & Teucher, B. (1997). Facial inversion effects: Parts and whole relationship. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 752-761.
38. Reed, C. L. (2002). What is the body schema? In W. Printz & A. Meltzoff (Eds.), The imitative mind: Development, evolution, and brain bases (pp. 233-243). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
39. Reed, C. L., & Farah, M. J. (1995). The psychological reality of the body schema: A test with normal participants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 334-343.
40. Reed, C. L., Stone, V., Bozova, S., & Tanaka, J. (2003). The body inversion effect. Psychological Science, 14, 302-308.
41. Reed, C. L., Stone, V. E., & McGoldrick, J. E. (2005). Not just posturing: Configural processing of the human body. In G. Knoblich, I. Thornton, M. Grosjean, & M. Shiffrar (Eds.), Human body perception from the inside out (pp. 229-258). New York: Oxford University Press.
42. Rhodes, G., Brake, S., & Atkinson, A. P. (1993). What's lost in inverted faces? Cognition, 47, 25-57.
43. Rhodes, G., Byatt, G., Tremewan, T., & Kennedy, A. (1996). Facial distinctiveness and the power of caricatures. Perception, 25, 207-223.
44. Rosenbaum, D. A., & Chaiken, S. (2001). Frames of reference in perceptual-motor learning: Evidence from a blind manual positioning task. Psychological Research, 65, 119-127.
45. Schwoebel, J., Buxbaum, L. J., & Coslett, H. B. (2004). Representations of the human body in the production and imitation of complex movements. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 21, 285-298.
46. Searcy, R. H., & Bartlett, J. C. (1996). Inversion and processing of component and spatial-relational information of faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 904-915.
47. Seitz, K. (2002). Parts and wholes in person recognition: Developmental trends. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 367-381.
48. Sinha, P. & Poggio, T. (1996, December 5). I think I know that face... Nature, 384, 404.
49. Sirigu, A., Grafman, J., Bressler, K., & Sunderland, T. (1991). Multiple representations contribute to body knowledge processing. Brain, 114, 629-642.
50. Slaughter, V., & Heron, M. (2004). Origins and early development of human body knowledge. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 69(2), 1-102.
51. Slaughter, V., Stone, V. E., & Reed, C. L. (2004). Perception of faces and bodies: Similar or different? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 219-223.
52. Tanaka, J. W., & Farah, M. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 46(A), 225-245.
53. Tanaka, J. W., & Gauthier, I. (1997). Expertise in object and face recognition. In R. L. Goldstone, P. G. Schyns, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation series, special volume: Perceptual mechanisms of learning (Vol. 36, pp. 83-125). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
54. Valentine, T. (1991). A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Exper imental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 43(A), 161-204.
55. Valentine, T., & Bruce, V. (1986). The effects of distinctiveness in recognising and classifying faces. Perception, 15, 525-535.
56. Yin, R. K. (1969). Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 141-145.