Measuring the Contributions of Perceptual and Attentional Processes in the Complete Composite Face Paradigm
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Defining and Measuring Holistic Face Processing
1.2. The Role of Divided Attention in Face Encoding and Recognition
1.3. Strategic Attentional Allocation in Face Processing
1.4. The Current Study
- Processing advantage for studied face halves. If holistic processing automatically increases sensitivity to global/configural information, then it should improve performance on previously studied face halves in context.
- Congruent, Aligned trials containing two studied face halves (i.e., Both-Old) should have higher Hits than Congruent, Misaligned trials.
- Congruent, Aligned trials containing two studied face halves (i.e., Both-Old) should have higher discriminability than Congruent, Aligned trials containing two unstudied face halves (i.e., Both-New).
- Processing disadvantage for irrelevant face halves. If holistic processing automatically reduces selective attention to face parts, then decrease performance for trials containing incongruent, irrelevant face halves.
- Incongruent, Aligned trials containing only one novel face half should have decreased Hits (for Irrelevant-New) and increased False Alarms (for Irrelevant-Old) relative to Incongruent, Misaligned trials.
- Incongruent, Aligned trials should have lower discriminability than Incongruent, Misaligned trials.
- Divided Attention disadvantage for Incongruent, Aligned face halves. If divided attention at encoding selectively impairs controlled processes, then it should impair performance requiring selective attention but not sensitivity to global/configural information.
- Divided attention should not substantially decrease Hits for Congruent, Aligned trials containing two studied face halves (i.e., Both Old).
- Divided attention should decrease discriminability for trials containing at least one novel face half, especially when Aligned.
- Processing disadvantages weaken negative effects of retention interval. Although memory declines are expected across retention intervals, failures of selective attention will exacerbate the effect by weakening memory for short term intervals, thereby reducing differences at increasing retention intervals.
- Performance on Congruent, Aligned trials with two studied face halves (i.e., Both-Old) will show significant declines across the four levels of retention intervals, regardless of Attention.
- Performance on Incongruent trials (both Aligned and Misaligned) will show less robust differences over retention interval.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Materials
2.3. Design
2.4. Procedure
3. Results
3.1. Hits
3.2. False Alarms
3.3. Discriminability
4. Discussion
4.1. Facial Perception as a Resource-Dependent Dual Process
4.2. Dynamic Contributions of Perceptual and Attentional Processing
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Goffaux, V.; Schiltz, C.; Mur, M.; Goebel, R. Local discriminability determines the strength of holistic processing for faces in the fusiform face area. Front. Psychol. 2013, 3, 604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Schiltz, C.; Dricot, L.; Goebel, R.; Rossion, B. Holistic perception of individual faces in the right middle fusiform gyrus as evidenced by the composite face illusion. J. Vis. 2010, 10, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartlett, J.C.; Searcy, J.; Abdi, H. What are the routes to face recognition? In Analytic and Holistic Processes in the Perception of Faces, Objects, and Scenes; Peterson, M., Rhodes, G., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 21–52. [Google Scholar]
- Cabeza, R.; Kato, T. Features are also important: Contributions of featural and configural processing to face recognition. Psychol. Sci. 2000, 11, 429–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gold, J.M.; Mundy, P.J.; Tjan, B.S. The perception of a face is no more than the sum of its parts. Psychol. Sci. 2012, 23, 427–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Richler, J.J.; Palmeri, T.J.; Gauthier, I. Meanings, mechanisms, and measures of holistic processing. Front. Psychol. 2012, 3, 553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanaka, J.W.; Farah, M.J. Parts and wholes in face recognition. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. Sect. A 1993, 46, 225–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meltzer, M.A. Learning facilitates dual-process face recognition regardless of holistic processing. Mem. Cogn. 2023, 51, 1416–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanaka, J.W.; Simonyi, D. The “parts and wholes” of face recognition: A review of the literature. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 2016, 69, 1876–1889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Meltzer, M.A.; Bartlett, J.C. Holistic processing and unitization in face recognition memory. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 2019, 148, 1386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piepers, D.W.; Robbins, R.A. A review and clarification of the terms “holistic,” “configural,” and “relational” in the face perception literature. Front. Psychol. 2012, 3, 559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKone, E.; Yovel, G. Why does picture-plane inversion sometimes dissociate perception of features and spacing in faces, and sometimes not? Toward a new theory of holistic processing. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2009, 16, 778–797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Searcy, J.H.; Bartlett, J.C. Inversion and processing of component and spatial–relational information in faces. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1996, 22, 904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amishav, R.; Kimchi, R. Perceptual integrality of componential and configural information in faces. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2010, 17, 743–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fitousi, D. Composite faces are not processed holistically: Evidence from the Garner and redundant target paradigms. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2015, 77, 2037–2060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fifić, M.; Townsend, J.T. Information-processing alternatives to holistic perception: Identifying the mechanisms of secondary-level holism within a categorization paradigm. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2010, 36, 1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fitousi, D. When two faces are not better than one: Serial limited-capacity processing with redundant-target faces. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2021, 83, 3118–3134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richler, J.J.; Gauthier, I. A meta-analysis and review of holistic face processing. Psychol. Bull. 2014, 140, 1281–1302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hole, G.J. Configurational factors in the perception of unfamiliar faces. Perception 1994, 23, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, O.S.; Richler, J.J.; Palmeri, T.J.; Gauthier, I. Revisiting the role of spatial frequencies in the holistic processing of faces. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2008, 34, 1327–1336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gauthier, I. What we could learn about holistic face processing only from nonface objects. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2020, 29, 419–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; Lou, Y.; Li, H.; Yuan, J.; Yang, J.; Winskel, H.; Qin, S. Distinct neural-behavioral correspondence within face processing and attention networks for the composite face effect. NeuroImage 2022, 246, 118756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, L.; Yang, Q.; Sommer, W.; Chen, C.; Guo, G.; Cao, X. The composite face effect between young and older Chinese adults remains stable. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 743056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, D.; Burton, A.M. Individual differences and the multidimensional nature of face perception. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 2022, 1, 287–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biotti, F.; Wu, E.; Yang, H.; Jiahui, G.; Duchaine, B.; Cook, R. Normal composite face effects in developmental prosopagnosia. Cortex 2017, 95, 63–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rossion, B. Twenty years of investigation with the case of prosopagnosia PS to understand human face identity recognition. Part I: Function. Neuropsychologia 2022, 173, 108278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fitousi, D. From global-to-local? uncovering the temporal dynamics of the composite face illusion using distributional analyses. Front. Psychol. 2020, 10, 2331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reinitz, M.T.; Morrissey, J.; Demb, J. Role of attention in face encoding. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1994, 20, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palermo, R.; Rhodes, G. The influence of divided attention on holistic face perception. Cognition 2002, 82, 225–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boutet, I.; Gentes-Hawn, A.; Chaudhuri, A. The influence of attention on holistic face encoding. Cognition 2002, 84, 321–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Carlson, C.A.; Gronlund, S.D.; Weatherford, D.R.; Carlson, M.A. Processing differences between feature-based facial composites and photos of real faces. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2012, 26, 525–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, X.J.; McCarthy, C.J.; Wang, T.S.; Palmeri, T.J.; Little, D.R. Composite faces are not (necessarily) processed coactively: A test using systems factorial technology and logical-rule models. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2018, 44, 833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lulav-Bash, T.; Avidan, G.; Hadad, B.S. Refinement of face representations by exposure reveals different time scales of biases in face processing. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2023, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrasco, M. Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vis. Res. 2011, 51, 1484–1525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolfe, J. Visual attention. In Seeing, 2nd ed.; De Valois, K.K., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2000; pp. 335–386. [Google Scholar]
- Baddeley, A.D.; Logie, R.H. Working memory: The multiple-component model. In Models of Working Memory; Miyake, A., Shah, P., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1999; pp. 28–61. [Google Scholar]
- Shepard, R.N.; Teghtsoonian, M. Retention of information under conditions approaching a steady state. J. Exp. Psychol. 1961, 62, 302–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palermo, R.; Rhodes, G. Are you always on my mind? A review of how face perception and attention interact. Neuropsychologia 2007, 45, 75–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ebner, N.C.; Riediger, M.; Lindenberger, U. FACES—A database of facial expressions in young, middle-aged, and older women and men: Development and validation. Behav. Res. Methods 2010, 42, 351–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, T.; Naveh-Benjamin, M. Assessing the associative deficit of older adults in long-term and short-term/working memory. Psychol. Aging 2012, 27, 666–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Craik, F.I.; Kirsner, K. The effect of speaker’s voice on word recognition. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 1974, 26, 274–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Algom, D.; Eidels, A.; Hawkins, R.X.; Jefferson, B.; Townsend, J.T. Features of response times: Identification of cognitive mechanisms through mathematical modeling. In The Oxford Handbook of Computational and Mathematical Psychology; Busemeyer, J.R., Wang, Z., Townsend, J.T., Eidels, A., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2015; pp. 63–98. [Google Scholar]
- Townsend, J.T.; Nozawa, G. Spatio-temporal properties of elementary perception: An investigation of parallel, serial, and coactive theories. J. Math. Psychol. 1995, 39, 321–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Donnelly, N.; Cornes, K.; Menneer, T. An examination of the processing capacity of features in the thatcher illusion. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2012, 74, 1475–1487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingvalson, E.M.; Wenger, M.J. A strong test of the dual-mode hypothesis. Percept. Psychophys. 2005, 67, 14–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wenger, M.J.; Townsend, J.T. On the costs and benefits of faces and words: Process characteristics of feature search in highly meaningful stimuli. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2006, 32, 755–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, C.-T.; Fific, M.; Chang, T.-Y.; Little, D.R. Systems factorial technology provides new insights on the other-race effect. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2018, 25, 596–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Eriksen, B.A.; Eriksen, C.W. Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Percept. Psychophysiol. 1974, 16, 143–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Erickson, W.B.; Weatherford, D.R. Measuring the Contributions of Perceptual and Attentional Processes in the Complete Composite Face Paradigm. Vision 2023, 7, 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision7040076
Erickson WB, Weatherford DR. Measuring the Contributions of Perceptual and Attentional Processes in the Complete Composite Face Paradigm. Vision. 2023; 7(4):76. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision7040076
Chicago/Turabian StyleErickson, William Blake, and Dawn R. Weatherford. 2023. "Measuring the Contributions of Perceptual and Attentional Processes in the Complete Composite Face Paradigm" Vision 7, no. 4: 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/vision7040076