Features, Configuration, and Holistic Face Processing

Oxford Handbook of Face Perception

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages

  Tanaka, James W ^a   Gordon, Iris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Configural information; Face processing; Holistic process; Object recognition; Perceptual field

Indexed keywords

EID: 85066529786     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199559053.013.0010     Document Type: Chapter

References (76)

1. Barton, J.J.S., Keenan, J.P., and Bass, T. (2001) Discrimination of spatial relations and features in faces: Effects of inversion and viewing duration. British Journal of Psychology, 92, 527-549.
2. Barton, J.J., Press, D.Z., Keenan, J.P., and O'Connor, M. (2002). Lesions of the fusiform face area impair perception of facial configuration in prosopagnosia. Neurology, 58, 71-78.
3. Barton, J.J., Zhao, J., and Keenan, J.P. (2003). Perception of global facial geometry in the inversion effect and prosopagnosia. Neuropsychologia, 41, 1703-1711.
4. Bentin, S., Sagiv, N., Mecklinger, A., Friederici, A., and von Cramon, Y.D. (2002). Priming visual face-processing mechanisms: electrophysiological evidence. Psychological Science, 13, 190-193.
5. Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-Components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94, 115-145.
6. Bindemann, M., Burton, A.M., and Jenkins, R. (2005). Capacity limits for face processing. Cognition, 98, 177-197.
7. Boutet, I., Gentes-Hawn, A., and Chaudhuri, A. (2002). The influence of attention on holistic face encoding. Cognition, 84, 321-341.
8. Bukach, C.M., LeGrand, R., Kaiser, M., Bub, D., and Tanaka, J.W. (2008). Preservation of featural and configural processing for the mouth region in a case of prospagnosia. Journal of Neuropsychology, 2, 227-244.
9. Caldara, R., Schyns, P., Mayer, E., Smith, M.L., Gosselin, F., and Rossion, B. (2005). Does prosopagnosia take the eyes out of face representations? Evidence for a defect in representing diagnostic facial information following brain damage. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1652-1666.
10. Carey, S. (1992). Becoming a face expert. Philosophical Transactions Royal Society of London B, 335, 95-103.
11. Carey, S. and Diamond, R. (1977). From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. Science, 195, 312-314.
12. Cheung O.S., Richler J.J., Palmeri T.J., Gauthier I. (2008). Revisiting the role of spatial frequencies in the holistic processing of faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1327-1336.
13. Cooper, E.E. and Wojan, T.J. (2000). Differences in the coding of spatial relations in face identification and basic-level object recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26, 470-488.
14. Diamond, R. and Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are not special: An effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 107-117.
15. D'Lauro, C., Tanaka, J.W., and Curran, T. (2008). The preferred level of face categorization depends on discriminability. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15 (3), 623-629.
16. Donnelly, D. and Davidoff, J. (1999). The mental representations of faces and houses: issues concerning parts and wholes. Visual Cognition, 6, 319-343.
17. Farah, M.J. (1991). Patterns of co-occurence among the associative agnosics: Implications for visual object representation. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 8, 1-19.
18. Farah, M.J. (1992). Is an object an object an object? Cognitive and neuropsychological investigations of domain-specificity in visual object recognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 164-169.
19. Freire, A., Lee, K., and Symons, L.A. (2000). The face-inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: Direct evidence. Perception, 29, 159-170.
20. Galton, F. (1879). Composite portraits, made by combining those of many different persons intoa single, resultant figure. Journal of the Anthropological Institute, 8, 132-144.
21. Gauthier, I. and Tarr, M.J. (1997). Becoming a "Greeble" expert: exploring the face recognition mechanism. Vision Research, 37, 1673-1682.
22. Gauthier, I., Williams, P., Tarr, M.J., and Tanaka, J.W. (1998). Training "Greeble" experts: a framework for studying expert object recognition processes. Vision Research, 38, 2401-2428.
23. Gauthier, I., Tarr, M.J., Moylan, J., Skudlarski, P., Gore, J.C., and Anderson, A. W. (2000). The fusiform "face area" is part of a network that processes faces at the individual level. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 495-504.
24. Goffaux, V. and Rossion, B. (2007). Face inversion disproportionately impairs the perception of vertical but not horizontal relations between features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 995-1002.
25. Grill-Spector, K. and Kanwisher, N. (2005). Visual recognition: as soon as you know it is there, you know what it is. Psychological Science, 16, 152-160.
26. Hoffman, D. and Richards, D. (1985). Parts in recognition. Cognition, 18, 65-96.
27. Jacques, C. and Rossion, B. (2006). The speed of individual face categorization. Psychological Science, 17, 485-492.
28. Johnston, J.C. and McClelland, J.L. (1980). Experimental tests of a hierarchical model of word identification. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 503-524.
29. Jolicoeur, P., Gluck, M.A., and Kosslyn, S.M. (1984). Pictures and names: Making the connection. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 243-275.
30. Kanwisher, N. and Yovel, G. (2006). The fusiform face area: a cortical region specialized for the perception of faces. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 361, 2109-2128.
31. Klin, A., Jones, W., Schultz, R., Volkmar, F., and Cohen, D. (2002). Visual fixation patterns during viewing of naturalistic social situations as predictors of social competence in individuals with autism. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 809-816.
32. Leder, H. and Bruce, V. (1998). Local and relational aspects of face distinctiveness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 51, 449-473.
33. Leder, H. and Bruce, V. (2000). When inverted faces are recognized: the role of configural information in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 53, 513-536.
34. Leder, H. and Carbon, C. C. (2006). Face-specific configural processing of relational information. British Journal of Psychology, 97, 19-29.
35. Lee, K. and Freire, A. (1999). Effects of face configuration change on shape perception: a new illusion. Perception, 28, 1217-1226.
36. Le Grand, R., Mondloch, C.J., Maurer, D., and Brent, H.P. (2001). Early visual experience and face processing. Nature, 410, 890.
37. Liu, J., Harris, A., and Kanwisher, N. (2002). Stages of processing in face perception: an MEG study. Nature Neuroscience, 5, 910-916.
38. Malcolm, G.L., Leung, C., and Barton, J.J. (2004). Regional variation in the inversion effect for faces: differential effects for feature shape, feature configuration, and external contour. Perception, 33, 1221-1231.
39. Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., and Mondloch, C.J. (2002). The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 255-260.
40. Maurer, D., O'Craven, K.M., Le Grand, R., et al. (2007). Neural correlates of processing facial identity based on features versus their spacing. Neuropsychologia, 45, 1438-1451.
41. McKone, E. (2004). Isolating the special component of face recognition: peripheral identification and a Mooney face. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 30, 181-197.
42. McKone, E. and Yovel, G. (2009). Why does picture-plane inversion sometimes dissociate perception of features and spacing in faces, and sometimes not? Toward a new theory of holistic processing. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16, 778-797.
43. McKone, E., Martini, P., and Nakayama, K. (2001). Categorical perception of face identity in noise isolates configural processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 573-599.
44. Mondloch, C.J., Le Grand, R., and Maurer, D. (2002). Configural face processing develops more slowly than featural face processing. Perception, 31, 553-566.
45. Moscovitch, M., Winocur, G., and Behrmann, M. (1997). What is special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9, 555-604.
46. Murray, J.E., Yong, E., and Rhodes, G. (2000). Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces. Psychological Science, 11, 492-496.
47. Palermo, R. and Rhodes, G. (2002). The influence of divided attention on holistic face perception. Cognition, 82, 225-257.
48. Reed, C.L., Stone, V.E., Bozova, S., and Tanaka, J. (2003). The body-inversion effect. Psychological Science, 14, 302-308.
49. Reinitz, M., Morrissey, J., and Demb, J. (1994). Role of attention in face encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 161-168.
50. Rhodes, G. (1988). Looking at faces: first-order and second-order features as determinants of facial appearance. Perception, 17, 43-63.
51. Rhodes, G., Brake, S., and Atkinson, A. (1993). What's lost in inverted faces? Cognition, 17, 25-57.
52. Rhodes, G., Hayward, W.G., and Winkler, C. (2006) Exert face coding: configural and component coding of own-race and other-race faces. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 13, 499-505.
53. Rhodes, G., Michie, P.T., Hughes, M.E., and Byatt, G. (2009). The fusiform face area and occipital face area show sensitivity to spatial relations in faces. European Journal of Neuroscience, 30, 721-733.
54. Richler. J.J, Tanaka, J.W., Brown, D.D., and Gauthier, I. (2008). Why does selective attention to parts fail in face processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 34, 1356-1368.
55. Riesenhuber, M., Jarudi, I., Gilad, S., and Sinha, P. (2004). Face processing in humans is compatible with a simple shape-based model of vision. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences, 271, S448-S450.
56. Rossion, B. (2008). Picture-plane inversion leads to qualitative changes of face perception. Acta Psychol (Amst), 128, 274-289.
57. Rossion, B. and Boremanse, A. (2011). Nonlinear relationship between holistic processing of individual faces and picture-plane rotation: Evidence from the face composite illusion. Journal of Vision, 11 (2):16, 1-21.
58. Rossion, B., Le Grand, R., Kaiser, M., Bub, D., and Tanaka, J.W. (2009). Preserved discrimination of mouth information in Patient PS. Journal of Neuropsychology, 3, 69-78.
59. Scapinello, K.F., and Yarmey, A.D. (1970). The role of familiarity and orientation in immediate and delayed recognition of pictorial stimuli. Psychonomic Science, 21, 329-330.
60. Searcy, J.H. and 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.
61. Sekuler, A. B., Gaspar, C.M., Gold, J.M., and Bennett, P.J. (2004). Inversion leads to quantitative, not qualitative, changes in face processing. Current Biology, 14, 391-396.
62. Sekunova, A. and Barton, J.J. (2008). The effects of face inversion on the perception of long-range and local spatial relations in eye and mouth configuration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1129-1135.
63. Sergent, J. (1984). An investigation intocomponent and configural processes underlying face perception. The British Journal of Psychology, 75, 221-242.
64. Tanaka, J.W. (2001). The entry point of face recognition: evidence for face expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 534-543.
65. Tanaka, J.W. and Farah, M.J. (1993) Parts and wholes in face recognition, The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 46, pp. 225-245.
66. Tanaka, J.W., and Sengco, J. (1997). Features and their configuration in face recognition. Memory and Cognition, 25, 583-592.
67. Tanaka, J.W., Kaiser, M.J., Bub, D.N. and Butler, S. (2009). Generalized impairment of featural and configural information in the lower half of the face through inversion. Poster presented at the Vision Science Society, Naples, Florida, May, 2008.
68. Valentine, T. (1988). Upside-down faces: A review of the effect of inversion upon face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 79, 471-491.
69. Valentine, T. and Bruce, V. (1986). The effect of race inversion and encoding activity upon face recognition. Acta Psychologica, 61, 259-273.
70. Vinette, C., Gosselin, F., and Schyns, P.G. (2004). Spatio-temporal dynamics of face recognition in a flash: it's in the eyes. Cognitive Science, 28, 289-301.
71. Wolf, J.M., Tanaka, J.W., Klaiman, C., et al. (2008). Specific impairment of face-processing abilities in children with autism spectrum disorder using the Let's Face It! skills battery. Autism Research, 1, 329-340.
72. Yarmey, A. (1971). Recognition memory for familiar "public" faces: Effects of orientation and delay. Psychonomic Science, 24, 286-288.
73. Yin, R. (1969). Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 141-145.
74. Young, A., Hellawell, D., and Hay, D.C. (1987). Configural information in face perception. Perception, 10, 747-759.
75. Yovel, G. and Duchaine, B. (2006). Specialized face perception mechanisms extract both part and spacing information: evidence from developmental prosopagnosia. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 580-593.
76. Yovel, G. and Kanwisher, N. (2004). Face perception: domain specific, not process specific. Neuron, 44, 889-898.