Gender in facial representations: A contrast-based study of adaptation within and between the sexes

PLoS ONE

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2011, Pages

  Oruç, Ipek ^a   Guo, Xiaoyue M ^a,b   Barton, Jason J S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b WELLESLEY COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FACIAL EXPRESSION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; SEX DETERMINATION; SEX DIFFERENCE; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL ADAPTATION; VISUAL STIMULATION; BAYES THEOREM; FACE; GENDER IDENTITY; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RECOGNITION; SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT; VISION;

BAYES THEOREM; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FACE; FEMALE; FIGURAL AFTEREFFECT; GENDER IDENTITY; HUMANS; MALE; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEX CHARACTERISTICS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 79251568362     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016251     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Blakemore C, Campbell FW (1969) On the existence of neurones in the human visual system selectively sensitive to the orientation and size of retinal images. J Physiol 203: 237-260.
2. Blakemore C, Sutton P (1969) Size adaptation: a new aftereffect. Science 166: 245-247.
3. Clifford CW (2002) Perceptual adaptation: motion parallels orientation. Trends Cogn Sci 6: 136-143.
4. Gibson JJ, Radner M (1937) Adaptation, after-effect, and contrast in the perception of tilted lines. I. Quantitative studies. Journal of Experimental Psychology 20: 453-467.
5. Shapley R, Enroth-Cugell C (1984) Visual Adaptation and Retinal Gain Controls. In: Osborne N, Chader G, eds. Progress in Retinal Research. London: Pergamon. pp 263-346.
6. Anstis S, Verstraten AJ, Mather G (1998) The motion aftereffect. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2: 111-117.
7. Levinson E, Sekuler R (1976) Adaptation alters perceived direction of motion. Vision Res 16: 779-781.
8. Graham N (1989) Visual pattern analyzers. New York: Oxford University Press.
9. Blakemore C, Nachmias J (1971) The orientation specificity of two visual aftereffects. J Physiol 213: 157-174.
10. Sekuler RW, Rubin EL, Cushman WH (1968) Selectivities of human visual mechanisms for direction of movement and contour orientation. J Opt Soc Am 58: 1146-1150.
11. Regan D, Beverley KI (1985) Postadaptation orientation discrimination. J Opt Soc Am A 2: 147-155.
12. Webster MA, Kaping D, Mizokami Y, Duhamel P (2004) Adaptation to natural facial categories. Nature 428: 557-561.
13. Leopold DA, O'Toole AJ, Vetter T, Blanz V (2001) Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects.[see comment]. Nature Neuroscience 4: 89-94.
14. Fox CJ, Barton JJ (2007) What is adapted in face adaptation? The neural representations of expression in the human visual system. Brain Res 1127: 80-89.
15. Fang F, He S (2005) Viewer-centered object representation in the human visual system revealed by viewpoint aftereffects. Neuron 45: 793-800.
16. Valentine T (1991) A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition. Q J Exp Psychol A 43: 161-204.
17. Valentine T (2001) Face-space models of face recognition. In: Wenger MJ, Townsend JT, eds. Computational geometric and process perspectives on facial cognition: contexts and challenges. MahwahN.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. pp 83-113.
18. Valentine T, Endo M (1992) Towards an exemplar model of face processing: the effects of race and distinctiveness. Q J Exp Psychol A 44: 671-703.
19. Valentine T, Chiroro P, Dixon R, eds. (1995) An account of the own-race bias and the contact hypothesis based on a 'face space' model of face recognition. New York: Routledge.
20. Little AC, DeBruine LM, Jones BC (2005) Sex-contingent face after-effects suggest distinct neural populations code male and female faces. Proc Biol Sci 272: 2283-2287.
21. Jaquet E, Rhodes G (2008) Face aftereffects indicate dissociable, but not distinct, coding of male and female faces. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 34: 101-112.
22. Ng M, Boynton GM, Fine I (2008) Face adaptation does not improve performance on search or discrimination tasks. Journal of Vision 8: 1-20.
23. Oruc I, Barton JJ (2010) A novel face aftereffect based on recognition contrast thresholds. Vision Res 50: 1845-1854.
24. Guo XM, Oruc I, Barton JJ (2009) Cross-orientation transfer of adaptation for facial identity is asymmetric: a study using contrast-based recognition thresholds. Vision Res 49: 2254-2260.
25. Rostamirad S, Barton JJ, Oruc I (2009) Center-surround organization of facespace: evidence from contrast-based face-priming. Neuroreport 20: 1177-1182.
26. He S, MacLeod DI (2001) Orientation-selective adaptation and tilt after-effect from invisible patterns. Nature 411: 473-476.
27. Magnussen S, Johnsen T (1986) Temporal aspects of spatial adaptation. A study of the tilt aftereffect. Vision Res 26: 661-672.
28. Coltheart M (1971) Visual feature-analyzers and after-effects of tilt and curvature. Psychol Rev 78: 114-121.
29. Webster MA, MacLin OH (1999) Figural aftereffects in the perception of faces. Psychon Bull Rev 6: 647-653.
30. Ng M, Ciaramitaro VM, Anstis S, Boynton GM, Fine I (2006) Selectivity for the configural cues that identify the gender, ethnicity, and identity of faces in human cortex. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103: 19552-19557.
31. Huber DE, O'Reilly RC (2003) Persistence and accommodation in short-term priming and other perceptual paradigms: temporal segregation through synaptic depression. Cognitive Science 27: 403-430.
32. Brainard DH (1997) The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision 10: 433-436.
33. Pelli DG (1997) The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision 10: 437-442.
34. Lundqvist D, Litton JE (1998) The Averaged Karolinksa Directed Emotional Faces - AKDEF. CD ROM from Clinical Neuroscience, psychology section, Karolinska Instituet.
35. Green DM, Swets JA (1988) Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Los Altos, CA: Peninsula Publishing.
36. Tjan BS, Braje WL, Legge GE, Kersten D (1995) Human efficiency for recognizing 3-D objects in luminance noise. Vision Res 35: 3053-3069.
37. Fox CJ, Oruc I, Barton JJ (2008) It doesn't matter how you feel. The facial identity aftereffect is invariant to changes in facial expression. J Vis 8: 11 11-13.
38. Watson AB, Pelli DG (1983) QUEST: a Bayesian adaptive psychometric method. Perception & Psychophysics 33: 113-120.
39. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ (1993) An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman Hall.
40. Rhodes G (2006) The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu Rev Psychol 57: 199-226.
41. Bestelmeyer PE, Jones BC, Debruine LM, Little AC, Perrett DI, et al. (2008) Sex-contingent face aftereffects depend on perceptual category rather than structural encoding. Cognition 107: 353-365.
42. Sergent J (1984) An Investigation into Component and Configural Processes Underlying Face Perception. British Journal of Psychology 75: 221-242.
43. Johnston RA, Milne AB, Williams C, Hosie J (1997) Do distinctive faces come from outer space? An investigation of the status of a multidimensional facespace. Visual Cognition 4: 59-67.
44. Campanella S, Chrysochoos A, Bruyer R (2001) Categorical perception of facial gender information: behavioural evidence and the face-space metaphor. Visual Cognition 8: 237-262.
45. Bülthoff I, Newell FN (2004) Categorical perception of sex occurs in familiar but not unfamiliar faces. Visual Cognition 11: 823-855.
46. Beale JM, Keil FC (1995) Categorical effects in the perception of faces. Cognition 57: 217-239.
47. Etcoff NL, Magee JJ (1992) Categorical perception of facial expressions. Cognition 44: 227-240.
48. Young AW, Rowland D, Calder AJ, Etcoff NL, Seth A, et al. (1997) Facial expression megamix: tests of dimensional and category accounts of emotion recognition. Cognition 63: 271-313.