The Face of Aging: Sensitivity to Facial Feature Relations Changes With Age

Psychology and Aging

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 846-850

  Murray, Janice E ^a   Halberstadt, Jamin ^a   Ruffman, Ted ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Aging; Configural; Face perception; Holistic

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AGING; ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE; ARTICLE; FACE ASYMMETRY; FACIES; FEMALE; GROUPS BY AGE; HUMAN; MALE; PERCEPTION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AGING; FACE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 78650975060     PISSN: 08827974     EISSN: 19391498     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0019864     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adachi I., Chou D.P., Hampton R.R. Thatcher effect in monkeys demonstrates conservation of face perception across primates. Current Biology 2009, 19:1270-1273.
2. Bakti A., Baron-Cohen S., Wheelwright S., Connellan J., Ahluwalia J. Is there an innate gaze module? Evidence from human neonates. Infant Behavior and Development 2000, 23:223-229.
3. Bertin E., Bhatt R.S. The Thatcher illusion and face processing in infancy. Developmental Science 2004, 7:431-436.
4. Calder A.J., Young A.W., Keane J., Dean M. Configural information in facial expression perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2000, 26:527-551.
5. Cronin-Golomb A., Gilmore G.C., Neargarder S., Morrison S.R., Laudate T.M. Enhanced stimulus strength improves visual cognition in aging and Alzheimer's disease. Cortex 2007, 43:952-966.
6. Crook T.H., Larrabee G.J. Changes in face recognition memory across the adult life span. Journal of Gerontology 1992, 47:138-141.
7. Farah M.J., Wilson K.D., Drain M., Tanaka J. What is " special" about face perception?. Psychological Review 1998, 105:482-498.
8. Gao L., Xu J., Zhang B., Zhou L., Harel A., Bentin S. Aging effects on early-stage face perception: An ERP study. Psychophysiology 2009, 46:970-983.
9. Grady C.L., McIntosh A.R., Horwitz B., Maisog J.M., Ungerleider L.G., Mentis M.J., Haxby J.V. Age-related reductions in human memory due to impaired coding. Science 1995, July 14, 269:218-221.
10. Grady C.L., McIntosh A.R., Horwitz B., Rapoport S.I. Age-related changes in the neural correlates of degraded and nondegraded face processing. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2000, 17:165-186.
11. Habak C., Wilkinson F., Wilson H.R. Aging disrupts the neural transformations that link facial identity across views. Vision Research 2008, 48:9-15.
12. Johnson M.H., Morton J. Biology and cognitive development 1991, Blackwell, Oxford, England.
13. Lamont A.C., Stewart-Williams S., Podd J. Face recognition and aging: Effects of target age and memory load. Memory & Cognition 2005, 33:1017-1024.
14. Leder H., Candrian G., Huber O., Bruce V. Configural features in the context of upright and inverted faces. Perception 2001, 20:73-83.
15. Mather M., Carstensen L.L. Aging and emotional biases for emotional faces. Psychological Science 2003, 14:409-415.
16. McKone E., Martini P., Nakayama K. Categorical perception of face identity in noise isolates configural processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2001, 27:573-599.
17. Mondloch C.J., Le Grand R., Maurer D. Configural face processing develops more slowly than featural face processing. Perception 2002, 31:553-566.
18. Moscovitch M., Moscovitch D.A. Super face-inversion effects for isolated internal or external features, and for fractured faces. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2000, 17:201-219.
19. Murray J.E. The ups and downs of face perception: Evidence for holistic encoding of upright and inverted faces. Perception 2004, 33:387-398.
20. Murray J.E., Yong E., Rhodes G. Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces. Psychological Sciences 2000, 11:492-496.
21. Norton D., McBain R., Chen Y. Reduced ability to detect facial configuration in middle-aged and elderly individuals: Associations with spatiotemporal visual processing. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 2009, 64:P328-P334.
22. Rakover S.S., Teucher B. Facial inversion effects: Parts and whole relationships. Perception & Psychophysics 1997, 59:752-761.
23. Rhodes G., Hayward W.C., Winkler C. Expert face coding: Configural and component coding of own-race and other-race faces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2007, 13:499-505.
24. Rossion B. Picture-plane inversion leads to qualitative changes of face perception. Acta Psychologica 2008, 128:274-289.
25. Rossion B., Boremanse A. Nonlinear relationship between holistic processing of individual faces and picture-plane rotation: Evidence from the face composite illusion. Journal of Vision 2008, 8:1-13.
26. Ruffman T., Henry J.D., Livingstone V., Phillips L.H. A meta-analytic review of emotion recognition and aging: Implications for neuropsychological models of aging. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 2008, 32:863-881.
27. Thomas C., Moya L., Avidan G., Humphreys K., Jung K.J., Peterson M.A., Behrmann M. Reduction in white matter conductivity, revealed by diffusion tensor imaging, may account for age-related changes in face perception. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:268-284.
28. Thompson P. Margaret Thatcher: A new illusion. Perception 1980, 9:483-484.
29. Turati C., Simion F. Newborns' recognition of changing and unchanging aspects of schematic faces. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 2002, 83:239-261.
30. Valentine T. The enduring nature of the Thatcher illusion. Perception 2009, 38:929-930.
31. Yin R.K. Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1969, 81:141-145.