Local discriminability determines the strength of holistic processing for faces in the fusiform face area

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 3, Issue JAN, 2013, Pages

  Goffaux, Valerie ^a,b,c   Schiltz, Christine ^b   Mur, Marieke ^a,d   Goebel, Rainer ^a,e  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LUXEMBOURG   (Luxembourg)

^c UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^d MRC COGNITION AND BRAIN SCIENCES UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^e NETHERLANDS INSTITUTE FOR NEUROSCIENCE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Face perception; Feature discriminability; FFA; Holistic; Interactive

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874668279     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00604     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Anaki, D., Nica, E. I., and Moscovitch, M. (2011). Automatic aspects in face perception: evidence from manda-tory processing of distractor facial components. Exp. Psychol. 58, 4-18.
2. Andrews, T. J., Davies-Thompson, J., Kingstone, A., and Young, A. W. (2010). Internal and external features of the face are represented holistically in face-selective regions of visual cortex. J. Neurosci. 30, 3544-3552.
3. Arcurio, L. R., Gold, J. M., and James, T. W. (2012). The response of face-selective cortex with single face parts and part com-binations. Neuropsychologia 50, 2454-2459.
4. Baker, C. I., Hutchison, T. L., and Kan-wisher, N. (2007). Does the fusiform face area contain subregions highly selective for nonfaces? Nat. Neurosci. 10, 3-4.
5. Betts, L. R., and Wilson, H. R. (2010). Heterogeneous structure in face-selective human occipito-temporal cortex. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22, 2276-2288.
6. Boynton, G. M., Engel, S. A., Glover, G. H., and Heeger, D. J. (1996). Linear systems analysis of func-tional magnetic resonance imaging in human V1. J. Neurosci. 16, 4207-4221.
7. Busigny, T., Jeong, C. S., and Barton, J. J. (2012). Holistic face process-ing induces perceptual shifts in face perception. J. Vis. 12, 639.
8. Cabeza,R.,and Kato,T. (2000). Features are also important: contributions of featural and configural processing to face recognition. Psychol. Sci. 11, 429-433.
9. Connor, C. E. (2010). Neuroscience. A new viewpoint on faces. Science 330, 764-765.
10. Dakin, S. C., Hess, R. F., Ledgeway, T., and Achtman, R. L. (2002). What causes non-monotonic tuning of fMRI response to noisy images? Curr. Biol. 12, R476-R477; author reply R478.
11. Farah, M., Wilson, K., Drain, M., and Tanaka, J. (1998). What is "special" about face perception? Psychol. Rev. 105, 482-498.
12. Freiwald, W. A., Tsao, D. Y., and Living-stone, M. S. (2009). A face feature space in the macaque temporal lobe. Nat. Neurosci. 12, 1187-1196.
13. Gilaie-Dotan, S., Gelbard-Sagiv, H., and Malach, R. (2010). Perceptual shape sensitivity to upright and inverted faces is reflected in neuronal adap-tation. Neuroimage 50, 383-395.
14. Goffaux, V. (2009). Spatial interactions in upright and inverted faces: re-exploration of spatial scale influ-ence. Vision Res. 49, 774-781.
15. Goffaux,V. (2012). The discriminability of local cues determines the strength of holistic face processing. Vision Res. 64, 17-22.
16. Goffaux, V., Peters, J., Haubrechts, J., Schiltz, C., Jansma, B., and Goebel, R. (2011). From coarse to fine? Spa-tial and temporal dynamics of corti-cal face processing. Cereb. Cortex 21, 467-476.
17. Goffaux, V., and Rossion, B. (2006). Faces are "spatial"-holistic face perception is supported by low spatial frequencies. J. Exp. Psy-chol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 32, 1023-1039.
18. Goffaux, V., and Rossion, B. (2007). Face inversion disproportionately impairs the perception of vertical but not horizontal relations between features. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Per-cept. Perform. 33, 995-1002.
19. Goffaux, V., Rossion, B., Sorger, B., Schiltz, C., and Goebel, R. (2009). Face inversion disrupts the percep-tion of vertical relations between fea-tures in the right human occipito-temporal cortex. J. Neuropsychol. 3, 45-67.
20. Grill-Spector, K., Henson, R., and Mar-tin, A. (2006). Repetition and the brain: neural models of stimulus-specific effects. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 10, 14-23.
21. Grill-Spector, K., Knouf, N., and Kan-wisher, N. (2004). The fusiform face area subserves face perception, not generic within-category identifica-tion. Nat. Neurosci. 7, 555-562.
22. Grill-Spector, K., Kourtzi, Z., and Kanwisher, N. (2001). The lateral occipital complex and its role in object recognition. Vision Res. 41, 1409-1422.
23. Grill-Spector,K.,and Malach,R. (2001). fMR-adaptation: a tool for study-ing the functional properties of human cortical neurons. Acta Psy-chol. (Amst.) 107, 293-321.
24. Grossman, E. D., and Blake, R. (2002). Brain areas active during visual per-ception of biological motion. Neu-ron 35, 1167-1175.
25. Harris, A., and Aguirre, G. K. (2008). The representation of parts and wholes in face-selective cortex. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 20, 863-878.
26. Harris, A., and Aguirre, G. K. (2010). Neural tuning for face wholes and parts in human fusiform gyrus revealedby FMRIadaptation. J. Neu-rophysiol. 104, 336-345.
27. Haxby, J. V., Hoffman, E. A., and Gob-bini, M. I. (2000). The distributed human neural system for face per-ception. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 4, 223-233.
28. Hayward, W. G., Rhodes, G., and Schwaninger, A. (2008). An own-race advantage for components as well as configurations in face recognition. Cognition 106, 1017-1027.
29. Hole, G. J. (1994). Configural factors in the perception of unfamiliar faces. Perception 23, 65-74.
30. Huk, A. C., and Heeger, D. J. (2002). Pattern-motion responses in human visual cortex. Nat. Neurosci. 5, 72-75.
31. Jacques, C., and Rossion, B. (2009). The initial representation of individual faces in the right occipito-temporal cortex is holistic: electrophysiologi-cal evidence from the composite face illusion. J. Vis. 9, 8 1-16.
32. James, T. W., Huh, E., and Kim, S. (2010). Temporal and spatial inte-gration of face, object, and scene features in occipito-temporal cortex. Brain Cogn. 74, 112-122.
33. Kanwisher, N., Mcdermott, J., and Chun, M. M. (1997). The fusiform face area: a module in human extras-triate cortex specialized for face per-ception. J. Neurosci. 17, 4302-4311.
34. Kanwisher, N., and Yovel, G. (2006). The fusiform face area: a cortical region specialized for the perception of faces. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 361, 2109-2128.
35. Kourtzi, Z., and Kanwisher, N. (2001). Representation of perceived object shape by the human lateral occipital complex. Science 293, 1506-1509.
36. Leder, H., and Carbon, C. C. (2005). When context hinders! Learn-test compatibility in face recognition. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. A 58, 235-250.
37. Liu, J., Harris, A., and Kanwisher, N. (2010). Perception of face parts and face configurations: an FMRI study. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22, 203-211.
38. Matthews, M. L. (1978). Discrimina-tion of identikit construction of faces: evidence for a dual process-ing strategy. Percept. Psychophys. 23, 153-161.
39. Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., and Mond-loch, C. (2002). The many faces of configural processing. Trends Cogn. Sci. 6, 255-260.
40. Maurer, D., O'craven, K. M., Le Grand, R., Mondloch, C. J., Springer, M. V., Lewis, T. L., et al. (2007). Neural correlates of processing facial identity based on features versus their spacing. Neuropsychologia 45, 1438-1451.
41. Mazard, A., Schiltz, C., and Rossion, B. (2006). Recovery from adaptation to facial identity is larger for upright than inverted faces in the human occipito-temporal cortex. Neuropsy-chologia 44, 912-922.
42. McKone, E., and Yovel, G. (2009). Why does picture-plane inversion some-times dissociate perception of fea-tures and spacing in faces,and some-times not? Toward a new theory of holistic processing. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 16, 778-797.
43. Mur, M., Ruff, D. A., Bodurka, J., Ban-dettini, P. A., and Kriegeskorte, N. (2010). Face-identity change activa-tion outside the face system: "release from adaptation" may not always indicate neuronal selectivity. Cereb. Cortex 20, 2027-2042.
44. Pitcher, D., Walsh, V., Yovel, G., and Duchaine, B. (2007). TMS evi-dence for the involvement of the right occipital face area in early face processing. Curr. Biol. 17, 1568-1573.
45. Rhodes,G.,Brake,S.,andAtkinson,A. P. (1993). What's lost in inverted faces? Cognition 47, 25-57.
46. Richler, J. J., Cheung, O. S., and Gau-thier, I. (2011). Holistic processing predicts face recognition. Psychol. Sci. 22, 464-471.
47. Richler, J. J., Tanaka, J. W., Brown, D. D., and Gauthier, I. (2008). Why does selective attention to parts fail in face processing? J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 34, 1356-1368.
48. Robbins, R., and McKone, E. (2007). No face-like processing for objects-of-expertise in three behavioural tasks. Cognition 103, 34-79.
49. Rosnow, R., and Rosenthal, R. (1996). Computing contrasts, effect sizes, and countermills on other peo-ple's published data: general proce-dures for research consumers. Psy-chol. Methods 1, 331-340.
50. Rossion, B. (2008). Picture-plane inver-sion leads to qualitative changes of face perception. Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 128, 274-289.
51. Rossion, B., Caldara, R., Seghier, M., Schuller, A. M., Lazeyras, F., and Mayer, E. (2003). A net-work of occipito-temporal face-sensitive areas besides the right mid-dle fusiform gyrus is necessary for normal face processing. Brain 126, 2381-2395.
52. Rotshtein, P., Geng, J. J., Driver, J., and Dolan, R. J. (2007). Role of features and second-order spa-tial relations in face discrimina-tion, face recognition, and individ-ual face skills: behavioral and func-tional magnetic resonance imag-ing data. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 19, 1435-1452.
53. Sawamura, H., Orban,G. A., andVogels, R. (2006). Selectivity of neuronal adaptation does not match response selectivity: a single-cell study of the FMRI adaptation paradigm. Neuron 49, 307-318.
54. Schiltz, C., Dricot, L., Goebel, R., and Rossion, B. (2010). Holistic percep-tion of individual faces in the right middle fusiform gyrus as evidenced by the composite face illusion. J. Vis. 10, 1-16.
55. Schiltz, C., and Rossion, B. (2006). Faces are represented holistically in the human occipito-temporal cortex. Neuroimage 32, 1385-1394.
56. Sergent, J. (1984). An investigation into component and configural processes underlying face perception. Br. J. Psychol. 75, 221-242.
57. Simmons, W. K., Bellgowan, P. S., and Martin, A. (2007). Measuring selec-tivity in fMRI data. Nat. Neurosci. 10, 4-5.
58. Steeves, J. K., Culham, J. C., Duchaine, B. C., Pratesi, C. C., Valyear, K. F., Schindler, I., et al. (2006). The fusiform face area is not sufficient for face recognition: evidence from a patient with dense prosopagnosia and no occipital face area. Neuropsy-chologia 44, 594-609.
59. Talairach, G., and Tournoux, P. (1988). Co-planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain. New York: Thieme.
60. Tanaka, J. W., and Farah, M. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recogni-tion. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. (Hove) 46, 225-245.
61. Tanaka, J. W., and Sengco, J. A. (1997). Features and their configuration in face recognition. Mem. Cognit. 25, 583-592.
62. Tootell, R. B., Reppas, J. B., Dale, A. M., Look, R. B., Sereno, M. I., Malach, R., et al. (1995). Visual motionaftereffect in human cortical area MT revealed by functional mag-netic resonance imaging. Nature 375, 139-141.
63. Van Belle, G., De Graef, P., Verfail-lie, K., Rossion, B., and Lefevre, P. (2010). Face inversion impairs holis-tic perception: evidence from gaze-contingent stimulation. J. Vis. 10, 10.
64. Young, A. M., Hellawell, D., and Hay, D. C. (1987). Configural informa-tion in face perception. Perception 10, 747-759.
65. Yovel, G., and Duchaine, B. (2006). Spe-cialized face perception mechanisms extract both part and spacing infor-mation: evidence from developmen-tal prosopagnosia. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 18, 580-593.
66. Yovel, G., and Kanwisher, N. (2004). Face perception: domain specific, not process specific. Neuron 44, 889-898.
67. Yovel,G.,and Kanwisher,N. (2005). The neural basis of the behavioral face-inversion effect. Curr. Biol. 15, 2256-2262.