The M170 reflects a viewpoint-dependent representation for both familiar and unfamiliar faces

Cerebral Cortex

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 364-370

  Ewbank, Michael P ^a   Smith, William A P ^a   Hancock, Edwin R ^a   Andrews, Timothy J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Face recognition; N170; Viewpoint invariance

Indexed keywords

FURAPYRIMIDONE;

ADAPTATION; ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; EVOKED RESPONSE; FACE; FACE PROFILE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY; MALE; NERVE CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VISUAL CORTEX;

ADULT; COGNITION; CUES; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FACE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MEMORY; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL CORTEX;

EID: 38849169789     PISSN: 10473211     EISSN: 14602199     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhm060     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Allison T, Puce A, Spencer D, McCarthy G. 1999. Electrophysiological studies of human face perception: I. Potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex by face and non-face stimuli. Cereb Cortex. 9:415-430.
2. Andrews TJ, Ewbank MP. 2004. Distinct representations for facial identity and changeable aspects of faces in the human temporal lobe. NeuroImage. 23:905-913.
3. Bentin S, McCarthy G, Perez E, Puce A, Allison T. 1996. Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans. J Cogn Neurosci. 8:551-565.
4. Bruce V, Young AW. 1986. Understanding face recognition. Br J Psychol. 77:305-327.
5. Burton AM, Bruce V, Hancock PJB. 1999. From pixels to people: a model of familiar face recognition. Cogn Sci. 23:1-31.
6. Campanella S, Hanoteau C, Depy D, Rossion, B, Bruyer R, Crommelinck M, Guerit J-M. 2000. Right N170 modulation in a face discrimination task: an account for categorical perception of familiar faces. Psychophysiology. 37:796-806.
7. Eger E, Schweinberger SR, Dolan RJ, Henson RN. 2005. Familiarity enhances invariance of face-representations in human ventral visual cortex: fMRI evidence. NeuroImage. 26:1128-1139.
8. Eimer M, McCarthy RA. 1999. Prosopagnosia and structural encoding of faces: evidence from event-related potentials. NeuroReport. 10:255-259.
9. Ewbank MP, Andrews TJ. 2006. Size-invariant, but viewpoint-specific adaptation of the N170 potential to faces. In: Proceedings of the 12th annual meeting of the Organisation for Human Brain Mapping, Florence. S113 p.
10. Fang F, He S. 2005. Viewer-centred object representation in the human visual system revealed by viewpoint aftereffects. Neuron. 45:793-800.
11. Gauthier I, Tarr MJ, Moylan J, Skudlarski P, Gore JC, Anderson JW. 2000. The fusiform face area is part of a network that processes faces at the individual level. J Cogn Neurosci. 12:495-504.
12. Gorno-Tempini ML, Price CJ, Josephs O, Vandenberghe R, Cappa SF, Kapur N, Frackowiak RS, Tempini ML. 1998. The neural systems sustaining face and proper-name processing. Brain. 12:2103-2118.
13. Grill-Spector K. 2006. Selectivity of adaptation in single units: implications for fMRI experiments. Neuron. 49:170-171.
14. Grill-Spector K, Henson R, Martin A. 2006. Repetition and the brain: neural models of stimulus-specific effects. Trends Cogn Sci. 10:14-23.
15. Grill-Spector K, Knouf N, Kanwisher K. 2004. The fusiform face area subserves face perception, not generic within-category identification. Nat Neurosci. 7:555-562.
16. Grill-Spector K, Kushnir T, Hendler T, Edelman S, Itzchak Y, Malach R. 1999. Differential processing of objects under various viewing conditions in human lateral occipital complex. Neuron. 24:187-203.
17. Halgren E, Raij T, Marinkovic K, Jousmaki V, Hari R. 2000. Cognitive response profile of the human fusiform face area as determined by MEG. Cereb Cortex. 10:69-81
18. Hancock PJB, Bruce V, Burton AM. 2000. Recognition of unfamiliar faces. Trends Cogn Sci. 4:330-337.
19. Harris AM, Duchaine BC, Nakayama K. 2005. Normal and abnormal face selectivity of the M170 response in developmental prosopagnosics. Neuropsychologia. 43:2125-2136.
20. Harris AM, Nakayama K. 2006. Rapid face-selective adaptation of an early extrastriate component in MEG. Cereb Cortex. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhj124.
21. Haxby JV, Hoffman EA, Gobbini MI. 2000. The distributed human neural system for face perception. Trends Cogn Sci. 4:223-233.
22. Henson RN, Rylands A, Ross E, Vuilleumeir P, Rugg MD. 2004. The effect of repetition lag on electrophysiological and haemodynamic correlates of visual object priming. NeuroImage. 21:1674-1689.
23. Hill H, Schyns PG, Akamatsu S. 1997. Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition. Cognition. 62:201-222.
24. Hoffman EA, Haxby JV. 2000. Distinct representations of eye gaze and identity in the distributed human neural system for face perception. Nat Neurosci. 3:80-84.
25. Itier RJ, Herdman AT, George N, Cheyne D, Taylor M. 2006. Inversion and contrast-reversal effects on face processing assessed by MEG. Brain Res. 1115:108-120.
26. Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. 2002. Inversion and contrast polarity reversal affect both encoding and recognition processes of unfamiliar faces: a repetition study using ERPs. NeuroImage. 15:353-372.
27. Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. 2004. Effects of repetition learning on upright, inverted and contrast-reversed face processing using ERPs. Neuro-Image. 21:1518-1532.
28. Jeffreys D. 1996. Evoked potential studies of face and object processing. Vis Cogn. 3:1-38.
29. Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun MM. 1997. The fusiform face area: a module in extrastriate cortex specialised for face perception. J Neurosci. 17:4302-4311.
30. Kloth N, Dobel C, Schweinberger SR, Zwitserlood P, Bolte J, Junghofer M. 2006. Effects of personal familiarity on early neuromagnetic correlates of face perception. Eur J Neurosci. 24:3317-3321.
31. Kovacs G, Zimmer M, Banko E, Harza I, Antal A, Vidnyanszky Z. 2006. Electrophysiological correlates of visual adaptation to faces and body parts in humans. Cereb Cortex. 16:742-753
32. Krekelberg B, Boynton GM, van Wezel RJA. 2005. Adaptation: from single cells to BOLD signals. Trends Neurosci. 29:250-256
33. Lee Y, Matsumiya K, Wilson HR. 2006. Size-invariant but viewpointdependent representation of faces. Vision Res. 46:1901-1910.
34. Liu J, Harris A, Kanwisher N. 2002. Stage of processing in face perception: an MEG study. Nat Neurosci. 5:910-916.
35. Logothetis NK, Pauls J, Poggio T. 1995. Shape representation in the inferior temporal cortex of monkeys. Curr Biol. 5:552-563.
36. Nobre AC, Allison TA, McCarthy G. 1994. Word recognition in the inferior temporal lobe. Nature. 372:260-263.
37. Perrett DI, Smith PAJ, Potter DD, Mistlin AJ, Head AS, Milner AD, Jeeves MA. 1985. Visual cells in temporal cortex sensitive to face view and gaze direction. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 223:293-317.
38. Pourtois G, Schwartz S, Seghier ML, Lazeyras F, Vuilleumier P. 2005. Portraits or people? Distinct representations of face identity in the human visual cortex. J Cogn Neurosci. 17:1043-1057.
39. Rotshtein P, Henson RN, Treves A, Driver J, Dolan RJ. 2005. Morphing Marilyn into Maggie dissociates physical and identity face representations in the brain. Nat Neurosci. 8:107-113.
40. Rolls ET, Baylis GC. 1986. Size and contrast have only small effects on the responses to faces of neurons in the cortex of the superior temporal sulcus of the monkey. Exp Brain Res. 65:38-48.
41. Sawamura H, Orban G, Vogels R. 2006. Selectivity of neuronal adaptation does not match response selectivity: a single-cell study of the fMRI paradigm. Neuron. 49:307-318.
42. Schweinberger SR, Huddy V, Burton AM. 2004. N250r: a face-selective brain response to stimulus repetitions. NeuroReport. 15:1501-1505.
43. Schweinberger SR, Pickering EC, Burton AM, Kaufmann JM. 2002. Human brain potential correlates of repetition priming in face and name recognition. Neuropsychologia. 40:2057-2073.
44. Smith WAP, Hancock ER. 2006. Recovering facial shape using a statistical model of surface normal direction. IEEE Trans PAMI. 28:1914-1930.
45. Wallis G, Bulthoff H. 1999. Learning to recognize objects. Trends Cogn Sci. 3:22-31.
46. Wantanabe S, Kakigi R, Puce A. 2003. The spatiotemporal dynamics of the face inversion effect: a magneto- and electro-encephalographic study. Neuroscience. 116:879-895.
47. Winston JS, Henson RNA, Fine-Goulden MR, Dolan RJ. 2004. fMRI-adaptation reveals dissociable neural representations of identity and expression in face perception. J Neurophysiol. 92:1830-1839.
48. Yin RK. 1969. Looking at upside-down faces. J Exp Psychol. 81:41-145.