The Thatcher illusion and face processing in infancy

Developmental Science

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 431-436

  Bertin, Evelin ^a,b   Bhatt, Ramesh S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR EVOLUTIONARY ANTHROPOLOGY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; FACIAL EXPRESSION; FEMALE; HABITUATION; HUMAN; INFANT; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTION DISORDER; PHYSIOLOGY; RECOGNITION; REVIEW; VISION;

FACIAL EXPRESSION; FEMALE; HABITUATION, PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGIC; HUMANS; INFANT; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PERCEPTUAL DISTORTION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 4444328500     PISSN: 1363755X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2004.00363.x     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. Bartlett, J.C., & Searcy, J. (1993). Inversion and configuration of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 281-316.
2. Barton, J.J.S., 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.
3. Bertin, E., & Bhatt, R.S. (2001). Figural goodness, stimulus heterogeneity, similarity and object segregation in infancy. Developmental Science, 4, 423-432.
4. Bhatt, R.S., & Waters, S.E. (1998). Perception of three-dimensional cues in early infancy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 70, 207-224.
5. Cabeza, R., & Kato, T. (2000). Features are also important: contribution of featural and configural processing to face recognition. Psychological Science, 11, 429-433.
6. Carey, S., & Diamond, R. (1977). From piecemeal to configural representation of faces. Science, 195, 312-314.
7. Carey, S., & Diamond, R. (1994). Are faces perceived as configurations more by adults than by children? Visual Cognition, 1 (2/3), 253-274.
8. Cohen, L.B., & Cashon, C.H. (2001). Do 7-month-old infants process independent features or facial configurations? Infant and Child Development, 10, 83-92.
9. Collishaw, S.M., & Hole, G.J. (2000). Featural and configural processing in the recognition of faces of different familiarity. Perception, 29, 893-909.
10. Deruelle, C., & de Schonen, S. (1998). Do the right and left hemispheres attend to the same visuo-spatial information within a face in infancy? Developmental Neuropsychology, 14, 535-554.
11. Diamond, R., & Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are and are not special: an effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115 (2), 107-117.
12. Easterbrook, M.A., Kisilevsky, B.S., Muir, D.W., & Laplante, D.P. (1999). Newborns discriminate schematic faces from scrambled faces. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53 (3), 231-241.
13. Fagan, J.F. (1970). Memory in the infant. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 9, 217-226.
14. Freire, A., & Lee, K. (2001). Face recognition in 4- to 7-year-olds: processing of configural, featural, and paraphernalia information. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 80, 347-371.
15. Freire, A., Lee, K., & Symons, L.A. (2000). The face-inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: direct evidence. Perception, 29, 159-170.
16. Hay, D.C., & Cox, R. (2000). Developmental changes in the recognition of faces and facial features. Infant and Child Development, 9 (4), 199-212.
17. Horowitz, F.D., Paden, L., Bhana, K., & Self, P. (1972). An infant-control procedure for studying infant visual fixation. Developmental Psychology, 7, 90.
18. Johnson, M.H., Dziurawiec, S., Ellis, H., & Morton, J. (1991). Newborns' preferential tracking of face-like stimuli and its subsequent decline. Cognition, 40, 1-19.
19. Johnson, M.H., & Morton, J. (1991). Biology and cognitive development. The case of face recognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
20. Leder, H., & Bruce, V. (2000). When inverted faces are recognized: the role of configural information in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 513-536.
21. Le Grand, R., Mondloch, C.J., Maurer, D., & Brent, H.P. (2001). Early visual experience and face processing. Nature, 410, 890 (Correction: Nature, 412, 786).
22. Lewis, M.B., & Johnston, R.A. (1997). The Thatcher illusion as a test of configural disruption. Perception, 26, 225-227.
23. Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., & Mondloch, C.J. (2002). The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 255-260.
24. Mondloch, C.J., Le Grand, R., & Maurer, D. (2002). Configural face processing develops more slowly than featural face processing. Perception, 31, 553-566.
25. Mondloch, C.J., Lewis, T.L., Budreau, D.R., Maurer, D., Dannemiller, J.L., Stephens, B.R., & Kleiner-Gathercoal, K.A. (1999). Face perception during early infancy. Psychological Science, 10, 419-422.
26. Murray, J.E., Yong, E., & Rhodes, G. (2000). Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces. Psychological Science, 11, 492-496.
27. Pascalis, O., deHaan, M., Nelson, C.A., & de Schonen, S. (1998). Long-term recognition memory for faces assessed by visual paired comparison in 3- and 6-month-old infants. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24 (1), 249-260.
28. Purcell, D.G., & Stewart, A.L. (1988). The face detection effect: configuration enhances detection. Perception and Psychophysics, 43, 355-366.
29. Rhodes, G., Geddes, K., Jeffery, L., Dziurawiec, S., & Clark, A. (2002). Are average and symmetric faces attractive to infants? Discrimination and looking preferences. Perception, 31, 315-321.
30. Rose, S.A., Jankowski, J.J., & Feldman, J.F. (2002). Speed of processing and face recognition at 7 and 12 months. Infancy, 3 (4), 435-455.
31. Searcy, J.H., & Bartlett, J.C. (1996). Inversion and processing of component and spatial-relational information in faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 904-915.
32. Sergent, J. (1984). An investigation into component and configural processes underlying face perception. British Journal of Psychology, 75, 221-242.
33. Schwarzer, G. (2000). Development of face processing: the effect of face inversion. Child Development, 71 (2), 391-401.
34. Slater, A., Quinn, P.C., Hayes, R., & Brown, E. (2000). The role of facial orientation in newborn infants' preference for attractive faces. Developmental Science, 3, 181-185.
35. Stürzel, F., & Spillmann, L. (2000). Thatcher illusion: dependence on angle of rotation. Perception, 29, 937-942.
36. Tanaka, J.W., & Farah, M.J. (1991). Second-order relational properties and the inversion effect: testing a theory of face perception. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 367-372.
37. Tanaka, J.W., & Farah, M.J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 46A (2), 225-245.
38. Tanaka, J.W., Kay, J.B., Grinnell, E., Stansfield, B., & Szechter, L. (1998). Face recognition in young children: when the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Visual Cognition, 5 (4), 479-496.
39. Thompson, L.A., Madrid, V., Westbrook, S., & Johnston, V. (2001). Infants attend to second-order relational properties of faces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 769-777.
40. Thompson, P. (1980). Margaret Thatcher - a new illusion. Perception, 9, 483-484.
41. Valenza, E., Simion, F., Cassia, V.M., & Umiltà, C. (1996). Face preference at birth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 892-903.