Face superiority effect

Last updated

In psychology, the face superiority effect refers to the phenomena of how all individuals perceive and encode other human faces in memory. Rather than perceiving and encoding single features of a face (nose, eyes, mouth, etc.), we perceive and encode a human face as one holistic unified element. [1] This phenomenon aids our visual system in the recognition of thousands of faces, [2] a task that would be difficult if it were necessary to recognize sets of individual features and characteristics. [3] However, this effect is limited to perceiving upright faces and does not occur when a face is at an unusual angle, such as when faces are upside-down or contorted in phenomena like the Thatcher effect and Pareidolia. [4]

Contents

Early history

In 1879, Galton's research [5] was some of the first to indicate that the face is “the sum of a multitude of small details, which are viewed in such rapid succession that we seem to perceive them all at a single glance.” This innate “holistic” perception is one of the main factors that differentiates face recognition from object recognition. To test this and further face superiority research in general, Tanaka and Farah [6] conducted a study where they assessed individuals’ ability to recognize facial features holistically. Participants were given an allotment of time to study several faces and then were tested on their ability to recognize one feature of the face. As the researchers predicted, participants were better able to recognize the feature when it was presented with the whole face, rather than when it was presented in isolation.

Other studies confirming the holistic processing theory involve the inversion condition, similar to the Thatcher Effect, where inverted, distorted, or disoriented faces are not as easily recognized. Yin's 1969 research [7] demonstrated this and supported his hypothesis which stated that familiar faces would not be recognized if the face is presented at an inverted state. While most objects in general are difficult to recognize when inverted, Yin exhibited that inverted faces caused a particular impairment in recognition. Similarly, the Thatcher Effect presents a face that is both distorted and upside-down, which individuals typically can't detect until they are presented the same image right-side-up, and are then able to see the obvious contortions.

Neuroscience behind face superiority

Evidence from neurophysiology studies with humans and monkeys also support face superiority. Neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies in humans shows the effects of holistic face recognition. In particular, when humans are shown normal upright faces, neuroimaging displays higher brain activity and response rates in the middle fusiform gyrus (MFG), and the inferior occipital gyrus (IOG) than when shown scrambled [8] or inverted faces. [9] Additionally, experiments computing event-related scalp potentials (ERPs) reveal higher brain responses 180ms after presenting the normal face, than in inverted/scrambled conditions. [10]

Additionally, research from Riesenhuber, Jarudi, Gilad, & Sinha, 2004; [11] K. Tanaka, Saito, Fukada, & Moriya, 1991; [12] and K. Tanaka, 1996 [13] also supports face superiority, where they demonstrate that face parts and wholes are similar to other hierarchical visual processes, in that the stimulation of simple features leads to the stimulation of complex features. This “feed-forward” theory states that the part-face information precedes and leads into the whole-face perception. However, the reverse model of this hierarchy states that the perception of the whole face leads to the perception of the parts. [14] [15]

Prosopagnosia face blindness

Prosopagnosia is a "selective impairment in the ability to recognize individual faces due to brain damage of the visual cortex." [16] Essentially, this neurological deficit impairs an individual's ability to recognize faces, even faces of those who should be familiar, such as family members. This is the result of damage to the visual cortex. In terms of the holistic view, the inability to recognize faces stems from a failure to integrate the individual face parts into a whole. [17] A study done by Busigny, Joubert, Felician, Ceccaldi, & Rossion (2010) [17] looked at a prosopagnosia patient, GG, in reference to unimpaired control participants in matching/recognition tasks. Participants were either asked to study a whole face and select a part from the studied face presented in isolation, or study an isolated part and then select the same part when presented in a whole face. The researchers hypothesized that holistic interference would be demonstrated in the "part-to-whole" and "whole-to-part" conditions relative to the "part-to-part" and "whole-to-whole" conditions. These results were confirmed in the control participants, however, patient GG performed equally well in both conditions. The researchers suggest this is due to her recognition of face parts is unaffected by surrounding facial features in encoding or retrieving it from memory. Similar studies have also been conducted to show that prosopagnosia results from an individual's inability to form a holistic facial representation. [16]

Sequential lineup superiority effect

In criminology, the sequential lineup superiority effect refers to the process presented to eye-witnesses during criminal investigations that has to do with suspect "line ups". This can include the use of photographs of multiple individuals including a suspect (or absent of one), or a line up with living members in an effort to identify a suspect of a crime. [18] It is used mainly to assist eye-witnesses more accurately decide on an individual within the line up who most represents the suspects description. The Sequential Lineup process includes a system that shows only one suspect (photograph or live person) at a time, and forcing a decision from the witness viewing the lineup. [18] According to the research done by Steblay, Nancy, Dysart, Jennifer, and Wells, Gary L., there were fewer incidents of false identifications when the Sequential Lineup method was used. [18]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wishful thinking</span> Formation of beliefs based on what might be pleasing to imagine

Wishful thinking is the formation of beliefs based on what might be pleasing to imagine, rather than on evidence, rationality, or reality. It is a product of resolving conflicts between belief and desire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Face perception</span> Cognitive process of visually interpreting the human face

Facial perception is an individual's understanding and interpretation of the face. Here, perception implies the presence of consciousness and hence excludes automated facial recognition systems. Although facial recognition is found in other species, this article focuses on facial perception in humans.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Prosopagnosia</span> Cognitive disorder of face perception

Prosopagnosia, more commonly known as face blindness, is a cognitive disorder of face perception in which the ability to recognize familiar faces, including one's own face (self-recognition), is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing and intellectual functioning remain intact. The term originally referred to a condition following acute brain damage, but a congenital or developmental form of the disorder also exists, with a prevalence of 2.5%. The brain area usually associated with prosopagnosia is the fusiform gyrus, which activates specifically in response to faces. The functionality of the fusiform gyrus allows most people to recognize faces in more detail than they do similarly complex inanimate objects. For those with prosopagnosia, the method for recognizing faces depends on the less sensitive object-recognition system. The right hemisphere fusiform gyrus is more often involved in familiar face recognition than the left. It remains unclear whether the fusiform gyrus is specific for the recognition of human faces or if it is also involved in highly trained visual stimuli.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thatcher effect</span> Optical illusion

The Thatcher effect or Thatcher illusion is a phenomenon where it becomes more difficult to detect local feature changes in an upside-down face, despite identical changes being obvious in an upright face. It is named after the then British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, on whose photograph the effect was first demonstrated. The effect was originally created in 1980 by Peter Thompson, Professor of Psychology at the University of York.

Visual agnosia is an impairment in recognition of visually presented objects. It is not due to a deficit in vision, language, memory, or intellect. While cortical blindness results from lesions to primary visual cortex, visual agnosia is often due to damage to more anterior cortex such as the posterior occipital and/or temporal lobe(s) in the brain.[2] There are two types of visual agnosia: apperceptive agnosia and associative agnosia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Inferior temporal gyrus</span> One of three gyri of the temporal lobe of the brain

The inferior temporal gyrus is one of three gyri of the temporal lobe and is located below the middle temporal gyrus, connected behind with the inferior occipital gyrus; it also extends around the infero-lateral border on to the inferior surface of the temporal lobe, where it is limited by the inferior sulcus. This region is one of the higher levels of the ventral stream of visual processing, associated with the representation of objects, places, faces, and colors. It may also be involved in face perception, and in the recognition of numbers and words.

Visual search is a type of perceptual task requiring attention that typically involves an active scan of the visual environment for a particular object or feature among other objects or features. Visual search can take place with or without eye movements. The ability to consciously locate an object or target amongst a complex array of stimuli has been extensively studied over the past 40 years. Practical examples of using visual search can be seen in everyday life, such as when one is picking out a product on a supermarket shelf, when animals are searching for food among piles of leaves, when trying to find a friend in a large crowd of people, or simply when playing visual search games such as Where's Wally?

In psychology and cognitive neuroscience, pattern recognition describes a cognitive process that matches information from a stimulus with information retrieved from memory.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fusiform face area</span> Part of the human visual system that is specialized for facial recognition

The fusiform face area is a part of the human visual system that is specialized for facial recognition. It is located in the inferior temporal cortex (IT), in the fusiform gyrus.

The greebles are artificial objects designed to be used as stimuli in psychological studies of object and face recognition. They were named by the American psychologist Robert Abelson. The greebles were created for Isabel Gauthier's dissertation work at Yale, so as to share constraints with faces: they have a small number of parts in a common configuration. Greebles have appeared in psychology textbooks, and in more than 25 scientific articles on perception. They are often used in mental rotation task experiments.

The cross-race effect is the tendency to more easily recognize faces that belong to one's own racial group. In social psychology, the cross-race effect is described as the "ingroup advantage," whereas in other fields, the effect can be seen as a specific form of the "ingroup advantage" since it is only applied in interracial or inter-ethnic situations. The cross-race effect is thought to contribute to difficulties in cross-race identification, as well as implicit racial bias.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biological motion</span> Motion that comes from actions of a biological organism

Biological motion is motion that comes from actions of a biological organism. Humans and animals are able to understand those actions through experience, identification, and higher level neural processing. Humans use biological motion to identify and understand familiar actions, which is involved in the neural processes for empathy, communication, and understanding other's intentions. The neural network for biological motion is highly sensitive to the observer's prior experience with the action's biological motions, allowing for embodied learning. This is related to a research field that is broadly known as embodied cognitive science, along with research on mirror neurons.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Visual perception</span> Ability to interpret the surrounding environment using light in the visible spectrum

Visual perception is the ability to interpret the surrounding environment through photopic vision, color vision, scotopic vision, and mesopic vision, using light in the visible spectrum reflected by objects in the environment. This is different from visual acuity, which refers to how clearly a person sees. A person can have problems with visual perceptual processing even if they have 20/20 vision.

Prosopamnesia is a selective neurological impairment in the ability to learn new faces. There is a special neural circuit for the processing of faces as opposed to other non-face objects. Prosopamnesia is a deficit in the part of this circuit responsible for encoding perceptions as memories.

Visual object recognition refers to the ability to identify the objects in view based on visual input. One important signature of visual object recognition is "object invariance", or the ability to identify objects across changes in the detailed context in which objects are viewed, including changes in illumination, object pose, and background context.

The N170 is a component of the event-related potential (ERP) that reflects the neural processing of faces, familiar objects or words. Furthermore, the N170 is modulated by prediction error processes.

Images and other stimuli contain both local features and global features. Precedence refers to the level of processing to which attention is first directed. Global precedence occurs when an individual more readily identifies the global feature when presented with a stimulus containing both global and local features. The global aspect of an object embodies the larger, overall image as a whole, whereas the local aspect consists of the individual features that make up this larger whole. Global processing is the act of processing a visual stimulus holistically. Although global precedence is generally more prevalent than local precedence, local precedence also occurs under certain circumstances and for certain individuals. Global precedence is closely related to the Gestalt principles of grouping in that the global whole is a grouping of proximal and similar objects. Within global precedence, there is also the global interference effect, which occurs when an individual is directed to identify the local characteristic, and the global characteristic subsequently interferes by slowing the reaction time.

Covert facial recognition is the unconscious recognition of familiar faces by people with prosopagnosia. The individuals who express this phenomenon are unaware that they are recognizing the faces of people they have seen before.

The face inversion effect is a phenomenon where identifying inverted (upside-down) faces compared to upright faces is much more difficult than doing the same for non-facial objects.

The occipital face area (OFA) is a region of the human cerebral cortex which is specialised for face perception. The OFA is located on the lateral surface of the occipital lobe adjacent to the inferior occipital gyrus. The OFA comprises a network of brain regions including the fusiform face area (FFA) and posterior superior temporal sulcus (STS) which support facial processing.

References

  1. Tanaka, J. W., & Farah, M. J. (2003). The holistic representation of faces. In M. A. Peterson, G. Rhodes, M. A. Peterson, G. Rhodes (Eds.), Perception of faces, objects, and scenes: Analytic and holistic processes (pp. 53-71). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
  2. Rhodes, G. (2013). Face recognition. In D. Reisberg, D. Reisberg (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive psychology (pp. 46–68). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195376746.013.0004
  3. Peterson, M. A., & Rhodes, G. (2003). Perception of faces, objects, and scenes: Analytic and holistic processes. New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
  4. McKone, E. (2010). Face and object recognition: How do they differ?. In V. Coltheart, V. Coltheart (Eds.), Tutorials in visual cognition (pp. 261–303). New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.
  5. Galton F. Composite portraits, made by combining those of many different persons into a single, resultant figure. Journal of the Anthropological Institute. 1879;8:132–144.
  6. Tanaka JW, Farah MJ. Parts and Wholes in Face Recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 1993;46A(2):225–245.
  7. Yin RK. Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 1969;81:141–145.
  8. Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun MM. The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience. 1997;17:4302–4311.
  9. Yovel G, Kanwisher N. Face perception: Domain specific, not process specific. Neuron. 2004;44(5):889–898.
  10. Rossion B, Gauthier I, Tarr MJ, Despland P, Bruyer R, Linotte S, Crommelinck M. The N170 occipito-temporal component is delayed and enhanced to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face-specific processes in the human brain. NeuroReport. 2000;11(1):69–74.
  11. Riesenhuber M, Jarudi I, Gilad S, Sinha P. Face processing in humans is compatible with a simple shape-based model of vision. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2004;271(Suppl_6):S448–S450.
  12. Tanaka K, Saito H, Fukada Y, Moriya M. Coding visual images of objects in the inferotemporal cortex of the macaque monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology. 1991;66(1):170–189
  13. Tanaka K. Inferotemporal cortex and object vision. Annual Review of Neuroscience. 1996;19:109–139. doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.19.1.109.
  14. Ahissar M, Hochetein S. Perceptual learning. In: Walsh V, Kulikowski J, editors. Perceptual constancies: Why things look as they. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, England: 1998. pp. 455–498
  15. Hochstein S, Ahissar M. View from the top: Hierarchies and reverse hierarchies in the visual system. Neuron. 2002;36(5):791–804.
  16. 1 2 Tanaka, J. W., & Simonyi, D. (2016). The “parts and wholes” of face recognition: a review of the literature. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (2006), 69(10), 1876–1889. http://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2016.1146780
  17. 1 2 Busigny T, Joubert S, Felician O, Ceccaldi M, Rossion B. Holistic perception of the individual face is specific and necessary: evidence from an extensive case study of acquired prosopagnosia. Neuropsychologia. 2010;48(14):4057–92.
  18. 1 2 3 Steblay, N. K., Dysart, J. E., & Wells, G. L. (2011). Seventy-two tests of the sequential lineup superiority effect: A meta-analysis and policy discussion. Psychology, Public Policy, And Law, 17(1), 99-139. doi:10.1037/a0021650