The Vanderbilt Expertise Test reveals domain-general and domain-specific sex effects in object recognition

Vision Research

Volumn 69, Issue , 2012, Pages 10-22

  McGugin, Rankin W ^a   Richler, Jennifer J ^a   Herzmann, Grit ^b   Speegle, Magen ^a   Gauthier, Isabel ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

Face; Object recognition; Perceptual expertise; Sex effects

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; FACE RECOGNITION; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; NORMAL HUMAN; OBJECT RECOGNITION; PREDICTION; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECOGNITION; RELIABILITY; SEX DIFFERENCE; VANDERBILT EXPERTISE TEST; VISUAL DISCRIMINATION; VISUAL STIMULATION; VOLUNTEER;

ADULT; AUTOMOBILES; FACE; FEMALE; FORM PERCEPTION; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEX FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84866180780     PISSN: 00426989     EISSN: 18785646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2012.07.014     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Barbarotto R., Laiacona M., Macchi V., Capitani E. Picture reality decision, semantic categories and gender: A new set of pictures with norms and an experimental study. Neuropsychologia 2002, 40:1637-1653.
2. Barton J.J.S., Hanif H., Ashraf S. Relating visual to verbal semantic knowledge: The evaluation of object recognition in prosopagnosia. Brain 2009, 132:3456-3466.
3. Bowles D.C., McKone E., Dawel A., Duchaine B., Palermo R., Schmalzl L., et al. Diagnosing prosopagnosia: Effects of ageing, sex, and participant stimulus ethnic match on the Cambridge Face Memory Test and Cambridge Face Perception Test. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2009, 25:423-455.
4. Brainard D.H. The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision 1997, 10(4):433-436.
5. Bukach C.M., Phillips S.W., Gauthier I. Limits of generalization between categories and implications for theories of category specificity. Attention, Performance and Psychophysics 2010, 1865-1874.
6. Carey S. Becoming a face expert. Philosophical Transcripts of the Royal Society London 1992, 335:95-102.
7. Cheung O.S., Richler J.J., Palmeri T.J., Gauthier I. Revisiting the role of spatial frequencies in the holistic processing of faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2008, 34:1327-1336.
8. Curby K.M., Glazek K., Gauthier I. A visual short-term memory advantage for objects of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2009, 35:94-107.
9. Dennett H.W., McKone E., Tavashmi R., Hall A., Pidcock M., Edwards M., et al. The Cambridge Car Memory Test: A task matched in format to the Cambridge Face Memory Test, with norms, reliability, sex differences, dissociations from face memory, and expertise effects. Behavioral Research 2011, 10.3758/s13428-011-0160-2.
10. Diamond R., Carey S. Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1986, 115:107-117.
11. Duchaine B., Germine L., Nakayama K. Family resemblance. ten familymembers with prosopagnosia and within-class object agnosia. Cognitive Neuroscience 2007, 24:419-430.
12. Duchaine B., Nakayama K. The Cambridge Face Memory Test: Results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants. Neuropsychologia 2006, 44:576-585.
13. Duchaine B., Wendt T.N., New J., Kulomaki T. Dissociations of visual recognition in a developmental agnostic: Evidence for separate developmental processes. Neurocase 2003, 9:380-389.
14. Duchaine B., Yovel G., Butterworth E.J., Nakayama K. Prosopagnosia as an impairment to face-specific mechanisms: Elimination of the alternative hypotheses in a developmental case. Cognitive Neuroscience 2006, 23:714-747.
15. Gainotti G. The influence of gender and lesion location on naming disorders for animals, plants and artefacts. Neuropsychologia 2005, 43:1633-1644.
16. Gauthier I., Curby K.M., Skudlarski P., Epstein R.A. Individual differences in FFA activity suggest independent processing at different spatial scales. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience 2005, 5:222-234.
17. Gauthier I., Curran T., Curby K.M., Collins D. Perceptual interference supports a non-modular account of face processing. Nature Neuroscience 2003, 6:428-432.
18. Gauthier I., Nelson C. The development of face expertise. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2001, 11:219-224.
19. Gauthier I., Skudlarski P., Gore J.C., Anderson A.W. Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3:191-197.
20. Gauthier I., Tarr M.J. Becoming a "greeble" expert: Exploring mechanisms for face recognition. Vision Research 1997, 37:1673-1682.
21. Gauthier I., Tarr M.J., Anderson A.W., Skudlarski P., Gore J.C. Activation of middle fusiform 'face area' increases with expertise in recognizing novel objects. Nature 1999, 2:568-573.
22. Germine L., Cashdollar N., Duzel E., Duchaine B. A new selective developmental deficit: Impaired object recognition with normal face recognition. Cortex 2011, 47:598-607.
23. Germine L., Duchaine B., Nakayama K. Where cognitive development and aging meet: Face learning ability peaks after age 30. Cognition 2010, 118:201-210.
24. Harel A., Gilaie-Dotan S., Malach R., Bentin S. Top-down engagement modulates the neural expressions of visual expertise. Cerebral Cortex 2010, 20:2304-2318.
25. Hayward W.G., Zhou G., Gauthier I., Harris I. Dissociating viewpoint costs in mental rotation and object recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2006, 13:820-825.
26. Herzmann G., Danthiir V., Schacht A., Sommer W., Wilhelm O. Toward a comprehensive test battery for face cognition: Assessment of the tasks. Behavior Research Methods 2008, 40:840-857. 10.3758/brm.40.3.840.
27. Kanwisher N., McDermott J., Chun M.M. The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience 1997, 17:4302-4311.
28. Konar Y., Bennett P.J., Sekuler A.B. Holistic processing is not correlated with face-identification accuracy. Psychological Science 2010, 21:38-43.
29. Laiacona M., Barbarotto R., Capitani E. Human evolution and the brain representation of semantic knowledge: Is there a role for sex differences?. Evolution and Human Behavior 2006, 27:158-168.
30. Laws K.R. Gender affects latencies for naming living and nonliving things. Cortex 1999, 35:729-733.
31. Lupyan G., Rakison D.H., McClelland J.L. Language is not just for talking: Labels facilitate learning of novel categories. Pyschological Science 2007, 18:1077-1083.
32. McGugin, R. W., Gatenby, J. C., Gore, J. C. & Gauthier, I. (submitted for publication). High-resolution imaging of expertise reveals reliable object selectivity in the FFA related to perceptual performance.
33. McGugin R.W., Gauthier I. Perceptual expertise with objects predicts another hallmark of face perception. Journal of Vision 2010, 10:1-12.
34. McGugin R.W., McKeeff T.J., Tong F., Gauthier I. Irrelevant objects of expertise compete with faces during visual search. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 2010, 73:309-317.
35. McGugin R.W., Tanaka J.W., Lebrecht S., Tarr M.J., Gauthier I. Race specific perceptual discrimination improvement following short individuation training with faces. Cognitive Science 2011, 35:330-347.
36. McKeeff T.J., McGugin R.W., Tong F., Gauthier I. Expertise increases the functional overlap between face and object perception. Cognition 2010, 117:355-360.
37. McKenna P., Parry R. Category-specificity in the naming of natural and man-made objects: Normative data from adults and children. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 1994, 4:255-281.
38. Moreno-Martinez F.J., Laws K.R., Schulz J. The impact of dementia, age and sex on category fluency: greater deficits in women with Alzheimer's disease. Cortex 2008, 44:1256-1264.
39. Moscovitch M., Winocur G., Behrmann M. What is special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 1997, 9:555-604.
40. Pelli D.G. The VideoToolbox software of visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision 1997, 10:437-442.
41. Rhodes G., Byatt G., Michie P.T., Puce A. Is the fusiform face area specialized for faces, individuation, or expert individuation?. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2004, 16:189-203.
42. Richler J.J., Cheung O.S., Gauthier I. Beliefs alter holistic face processing...if Response Bias is Not Taken into Account. Journal of Vision 2011, 11:1-13.
43. Richler J.J., Cheung O.S., Gauthier I. Holistic processing predicts face recognition. Psychological Science 2011, 22:464-471.
44. Richler J.J., Mack M.L., Palmeri T.J., Gauthier I. Inverted faces are (eventually) processed holistically. Vision Research 2011, 51:333-342.
45. Richler J.J., Tanaka J.W., Brown D.D., Gauthier I. Why does selective attention to parts fail in face processing?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 2008, 34:1356-1368.
46. Rossion B., Curran T. Visual expertise with pictures of cars correlates with RT magnitude of the car inversion effect. Perception 2010, 39:173-183.
47. Rossion B., Gauthier I. How does the brain process upright and inverted faces? Behavioral and cognitive neuroscience reviews. Developmental Psychobiology 2002, 1:63-75.
48. Rossion B., Kung C.-C., Tarr M.J. Visual expertise with nonface objects leads to competition with the early perceptual processing of faces in the human occipitotemporal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 2004, 101:14521-14526.
49. Scott L.S., Tanaka J.W., Sheinberg D.L., Curran T. A re-evaluation of the electrophysiological correlates of expert object processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2006, 18:1453-1465.
50. Tanaka J.W., Curran T., Sheinberg D.L. The training and transfer of real world perceptual expertise. Psychological Science 2005, 16:145-151.
51. Tanaka J.W., Farah M.J. Parts and wholes in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1993, 46:225-245.
52. Thompson P. Margaret Thatcher: A new illusion. Perception 1980, 9:483-484.
53. Troje N.F., Buthoff H.H. How is bilateral symmetry of human faces used for recognition of novel views?. Vision Research 1996, 38:79-89.
54. Wang, R., Li, J., Fang, H., Tian, M., & Liu, J. (in press). Holistic processing and face recognition. Psychological Science. doi:10.1177/0956797611420575.
55. Wilhelm O., Herzmann G., Kunina O., Danthiir V., Schacht A., Sommer W. Individual differences in perceiving and recognizing faces-One element of social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2010, 99:530-548.
56. Williams N.R., Willenbockel V., Gauthier I. Sensitivty to spatial frequency and orientation content is not specific to face perception. Vision Research 2009, 49:2353-2362.
57. Wilmer J.B., Germine L., Chabris C.F., Chatterjee G., Williams M., Loken E., et al. Human face recognition ability is specific and highly heritable. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2010, 107:5238-5241.
58. Wong A.C., Palmeri T.J., Gauthier I. Conditions for facelike expertise with objects: Becoming a Ziggerin expert - but which type?. Psychological Science 2009, 20:1108-1117.
59. Wong Y.K., Twedt E., Sheinberg D., Gauthier I. Does Thompson's Thatcher effect reflect a face-specific mechanism?. Perception 2010, 1125-1141.
60. Woolley A.W., Gerbasi M.E., Chabris C.F., Kosslyn S.M., Hackman J.R. Bringing in the experts: How team ability composition and collaborative planning jointly shape analytic effectiveness. Small Group Research 2008, 39:352-371.
61. Xu Y. Revisiting the role of the fusiform face area in visual expertise. Cerebral Cortex 2005, 15:1234-1242.
62. Young A.W., Hellawell D., Hay D. Configural information in face perception. Perception 1987, 10:747-759.
63. Zhu Q., et al. Heritability of the specific cognitive ability of face perception. Current Biology 2010, 20:1-6.