Jump to content

Face inversion effect

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Aj-2018 (talk | contribs) at 03:10, 27 May 2018 (Aj-2018 moved page User:Aj-2018/sandbox to Face Inversion Effect). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.[1][2]

A typical study examining the face inversion effect would have images of the inverted and upright object presented to participants and time how long it takes them to recognise that object as what it actually is (i.e. a picture of a face as a face). The face inversion effect occurs when, compared to other objects, it takes a disproportionately longer time to recognise faces when they are inverted as opposed to upright.[3][4]

Faces are normally processed in the special face-selective regions of the brain, such as the fusiform face area.[5] However, processing inverted faces involves both face-selective regions and the scene and object recognition regions of the parahippocampal place area and lateral occipital cortex.[6][7] There seems to be something different about inverted faces that requires them to also involve these scene and object processing mechanisms.[8]

The most supported explanation for why faces take longer to recognise when they are inverted is the configural information hypothesis. The configural information hypothesis states that faces are processed with the use of configural information to form a holistic (whole) representation of a face. Objects, however, are not processed in this configural way. Instead, they are processed locally (in parts). Inverting a face disrupts configural processing, forcing it to instead be processed locally like other objects. This causes a delay since it takes longer to form a representation of a face with only local information.[9]

Neural systems of face recognition

Location of the Fusiform Face Area

Faces are processed in separate areas of the brain to other stimuli. For example, the fusiform face area (FFA) is a face-selective region in the brain that is only used for facial processing.[5] The FFA responds more to upright but not inverted faces, demonstrating that inverted faces are not detected the same way as upright faces are.[10]

The scene-selective parahippocampal place area (PPA) processes places, or scenes of the visual environment.[6] The object recognition area in the lateral occipital cortex (LOC) is involved in the processing of objects.[7] Together, these regions are used when processing inverted, but not upright faces. This suggests that there is something special about inverted compared to upright faces that requires them to involve object and scene processing regions.[8]

There is still some activity in face recognition regions when viewing inverted faces.[11] Evidence has found that a face-selective region in the brain known as the occipital face area (OFA) is involved in the processing of both upright and inverted faces.[8][10]

Overall, face and object processing mechanisms seem to be separate in the brain. Recognising upright faces involves special facial recognition regions, but recognising inverted faces involves both face and non-facial stimuli recognition regions.

Face vs. object recognition

Configural information

Configural information helps people to quickly recognise faces. It involves the arrangement of facial features, such as the eyes and nose. There are two types of configural information: first-order relational information and second-order relational information.[12]

First-order relational information consists of the spatial relationships between different features of the face. These relationships between facial features are common to most people, for example, having the mouth located under the nose, and thus first-order relational information helps to identify a face as a face and not some other object.[12]

Second-order relational information is the size of the relationships between the features of the face, relative to a prototype (a model of what a face should look like). This type of information helps to distinguish one face from another, since it is different between different faces.[12]

Holistic processing for faces

Holistic processing of faces describes the perception of faces as wholes, rather than the sum of their parts. According to the configural information hypothesis of face recognition, recognising faces involves two stages that use configural (relational) information to form holistic representations of faces.[13]

The configural view of facial recognition is supported by studies showing that face-selective activity in the brain was delayed when the configural information of faces was disrupted (for example, when faces were inverted).[14] This implies that it took longer to recognise the faces as faces instead of other objects. The existence of the face inversion effect therefore supports the configural information hypothesis.

Stages of face recognition

The first stage of recognising faces in the configural information hypothesis is first-level information processing. This stage uses first-order relational information to detect a face - i.e. to determine that a face is actually a face and not another object. Building a holistic representation of a face occurs at this early stage of face processing, to allow the quick detection of faces.[13]

The next stage, second-level information processing, distinguishes one face from another with the use of second-order relational information.[13]

Local processing for objects

An inversion effect does not seem to occur for non-facial objects, suggesting that faces and other objects are processed using different mechanisms. Specifically, face recognition involves configural information to process faces holistically. However, object recognition does not use configural information to form a holistic representation. Instead, each part of the object is processed separately to allow it to be recognised. This is a local rather than holistic recognition method.[12]

Role of experience

The configural processing hypothesis and the existence of face-specific areas in the brain support the idea that there are differences between face and object processing. However, it is also argued that the level of experience with viewing a particular type of stimulus (for example, faces or cars) underlies any differences how quickly that stimulus is recognised. This means that faces may only be recognised quickly because they are very familiar.[15]

Theories

Configural information hypothesis

According to the configural information hypothesis, the face inversion effect occurs because configural information can no longer be used to build a holistic representation of a face. Inverted faces, similarly to objects, are instead processed using local information (i.e. individual features of the face). This causes a delay since, unlike faces, objects do not have a specific holistic mechanism that allows them to be quickly detected. In particular, upright faces are quickly detected by forming an early holistic representation of the face. However, only local information is available when viewing inverted faces, which means that this stage is disrupted and faces cannot be quickly detected.[9]

Alternate hypotheses

Although the configural processing hypothesis is a popular explanation for the face inversion effect, there have been some challenges to this theory.

It has been suggested that there are not in fact separate mechanisms for processing faces and objects. Rather than holistic processing for faces and local processing for objects, they are both processed locally.[16] The face inversion effect is therefore not caused by delay from faces being processed as objects. Instead, another element is involved. Two potential explanations follow.

Perceptual learning

Perceptual learning is a common alternative explanation to the configural processing hypothesis. According to the perceptual learning theory, perceiving a stimulus more often makes it easier to recognise. The face inversion effect is therefore caused by increased experience with recognising upright faces compared to inverted faces.[17] Since faces are viewed very often, it follows that highly efficient mechanisms have developed in order to quickly detect and identify them.[18]

Face-scheme incompatibility

The face-scheme incompatibility model has been proposed in order to explain some of the missing elements of the configural information hypothesis. According to the model, faces are processed and assigned meaning by the use of schemes and prototypes.[19]

According to the model, a scheme is an abstract representation of the general structure of a face, including characteristics common to most faces (i.e. the structure of and relationships between facial features). A prototype refers to an image of what an average face would look like for a particular group (e.g. humans or monkeys). After being recognised as a face with the use of a scheme, new faces are added to a group by being evaluated for their similarity to that group's prototype.[19]

There are different schemes for upright and inverted faces: upright faces are more frequently viewed and thus have more efficient schemes than inverted faces. The face inversion effect is thus partly caused by less efficient schemes for processing the less familiar inverted form of faces.[19]

This model is similar to the perceptual learning theory, in that both consider the role of experience important in the quick recognition of faces.[17][19]

Development

The ability to quickly detect and recognise faces was important in early human life, and is still important today. For example, facial expressions can provide various signals important for communication.[20][21] Highly efficient facial recognition mechanisms have therefore developed to support this ability.[15]

As humans get older, they become more familiar with upright human faces and continuously refine the mechanisms used to recognise them.[22] This process develops to allow people to quickly detect faces around them, facilitating social interaction.[20]

By about the first year, infants are familiar with faces in their upright form and are thus susceptible to the face inversion effect. As they age, they get better at recognising faces and so the face inversion effect becomes stronger.[22] The increased strength of the face inversion effect over time supports the perceptual learning hypothesis, since more experience with faces results in increased susceptibly to the effect.[17]

The more familiar a particular type of face (e.g. human or dog) is, the more susceptible one is to the face inversion effect for that face. This applies to both humans and other species. For example, older chimpanzees familiar with human faces experienced the face inversion effect when viewing human faces, but the same result did not occur for younger chimpanzees familiar with chimpanzee faces.[23] The face inversion effect was also stronger for dog experts viewing dog faces.[12] This evidence implies that familiarity with a particular type of face develops over time and is necessary in order for the face inversion effect to occur.

Exceptions

There are a number of conditions that may reduce or even eliminate the face inversion effect. This is because the mechanism used to recognise faces by forming holistic representations is absent or disrupted. This can cause faces to be processed the same way as non-facial objects.

Prosopagnosia

Prosopagnosia: face blindness

Prosopagnosia is a condition marked by an inability to recognise faces.[24]

The fusiform gyrus, a facial recognition area of the brain, is activated differently in those with prosopagnosia upon viewing faces.[25] Additionally, non-facial object recognition areas (such as the ventral occipitotemporal extrastriate cortex) are activated when viewing faces, suggesting that faces and objects are processed in the same way.[11]

Individuals with prosopagnosia can be unaffected or even benefit from face inversion in facial recognition tasks.[24][26] Inverted faces, like objects, are processed locally rather than holistically.[27] Since those with prosopagnosia also process upright faces locally, this explains why there is no delay between viewing upright and inverted faces.[11]

Autism Spectrum Disorder

Like those with prosopagnosia, individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) do not use a configural processing mechanism to form a holistic representation of a face.[28] Instead, they tend to process faces with the use of local or featural information.[29] This means that the same local mechanisms are used for processing upright faces, inverted faces, and objects. Consequentially, the face inversion effect is less likely to occur in those with ASD.[30]

However, there is some evidence that the development of a holistic facial recognition mechanism in those with ASD is simply delayed, rather than missing. This would mean that there would be a difference between the processing of upright and inverted faces, and therefore they could eventually become susceptible to the face inversion effect.[31]

See also

References

  1. ^ Civile, Ciro; Mclaren, Rossy; Mclaren, I.P.L. (2013-09-23). The face inversion effect—Parts and wholes: Individual features and their configuration. Vol. 67.
  2. ^ Yin, Robert K. (1969). "Looking at upside-down faces". Journal of Experimental Psychology. 81 (1): 141–145. doi:10.1037/h0027474. ISSN 0022-1015.
  3. ^ Farah, M. J.; Wilson, K. D.; Drain, H. M.; Tanaka, J. R. (1995). "The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms". Vision Research. 35 (14): 2089–2093. ISSN 0042-6989. PMID 7660612.
  4. ^ Thornton, Ian; Mullins, Emma; Banahan, Kara (2011). "Motion can amplify the face-inversion effect". Psihologija. 44 (1): 5–22. doi:10.2298/psi1101005t.
  5. ^ a b Kanwisher, Nancy; Yovel, Galit (2006-12-29). "The fusiform face area: a cortical region specialized for the perception of faces 9". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 361 (1476): 2109–2128. doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.1934. PMC 1857737. PMID 17118927.
  6. ^ a b Epstein, Russell; Kanwisher, Nancy (1998). "A cortical representation of the local visual environment". Nature. 392 (6676): 598–601. doi:10.1038/33402. ISSN 0028-0836.
  7. ^ a b Malach, R; Reppas, J B; Benson, R R; Kwong, K K; Jiang, H; Kennedy, W A; Ledden, P J; Brady, T J; Rosen, B R (1995-08-29). "Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 92 (18): 8135–8139. ISSN 0027-8424. PMID 7667258.
  8. ^ a b c Pitcher, David; Duchaine, Bradley; Walsh, Vincent; Yovel, Galit; Kanwisher, Nancy (2011). "The role of lateral occipital face and object areas in the face inversion effect". Neuropsychologia. 49 (12): 3448–3453. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.08.020. ISSN 0028-3932.
  9. ^ a b Freire, Alejo; Lee, Kang; Symons, Lawrence A (2000). "The Face-Inversion Effect as a Deficit in the Encoding of Configural Information: Direct Evidence". Perception. 29 (2): 159–170. doi:10.1068/p3012. ISSN 0301-0066.
  10. ^ a b Yovel, Galit; Kanwisher, Nancy (2005). "The Neural Basis of the Behavioral Face-Inversion Effect". Current Biology. 15 (24): 2256–2262. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2005.10.072. ISSN 0960-9822.
  11. ^ a b c Haxby, James V; Ungerleider, Leslie G; Clark, Vincent P; Schouten, Jennifer L; Hoffman, Elizabeth A; Martin, Alex (1999). "The Effect of Face Inversion on Activity in Human Neural Systems for Face and Object Perception". Neuron. 22 (1): 189–199. doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80690-x. ISSN 0896-6273.
  12. ^ a b c d e Civile, Ciro; McLaren, Rossy; McLaren, Ian P. L. (2016). "The Face Inversion Effect: Roles of First and Second-Order Configural Information". The American Journal of Psychology. 129 (1): 23–35. doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.129.1.0023.
  13. ^ a b c Taubert, Jessica; Apthorp, Deborah; Aagten-Murphy, David; Alais, David (2011). "The role of holistic processing in face perception: Evidence from the face inversion effect". Vision Research. 51 (11): 1273–1278. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2011.04.002. ISSN 0042-6989.
  14. ^ "Spatio-temporal localization of the face inversion effect: an event-related potentials study". Biological Psychology. 50 (3): 173–189. 1999-07-01. doi:10.1016/S0301-0511(99)00013-7. ISSN 0301-0511.
  15. ^ a b Wallis, Guy (2013). "Toward a unified model of face and object recognition in the human visual system". Frontiers in Psychology. 4. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00497. ISSN 1664-1078.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  16. ^ Matsuyoshi, Daisuke; Morita, Tomoyo; Kochiyama, Takanori; Tanabe, Hiroki C.; Sadato, Norihiro; Kakigi, Ryusuke (2015-03-11). "Dissociable Cortical Pathways for Qualitative and Quantitative Mechanisms in the Face Inversion Effect". Journal of Neuroscience. 35 (10): 4268–4279. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3960-14.2015. ISSN 0270-6474. PMID 25762673.
  17. ^ a b c Sekuler, Allison B; Gaspar, Carl M; Gold, Jason M; Bennett, Patrick J (2004). "Inversion Leads to Quantitative, Not Qualitative, Changes in Face Processing". Current Biology. 14 (5): 391–396. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2004.02.028. ISSN 0960-9822.
  18. ^ Gold, J.; Bennett, P. J.; Sekuler, A. B. (1999). "Signal but not noise changes with perceptual learning". Nature. 402 (6758): 176–178. doi:10.1038/46027. ISSN 0028-0836.
  19. ^ a b c d Rakover, Sam S. (2013-08-01). "Explaining the face-inversion effect: the face–scheme incompatibility (FSI) model". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 20 (4): 665–692. doi:10.3758/s13423-013-0388-1. ISSN 1069-9384.
  20. ^ a b Schmidt, Karen L.; Cohn, Jeffrey F. (2001). "Human Facial Expressions as Adaptations: Evolutionary Questions in Facial Expression Research". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. Suppl 33: 3–24. doi:10.1002/ajpa.2001. ISSN 0002-9483. PMC 2238342. PMID 11786989.
  21. ^ Goldman, Alvin I.; Sripada, Chandra Sekhar (2005). "Simulationist models of face-based emotion recognition". Cognition. 94 (3): 193–213. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.01.005. ISSN 0010-0277.
  22. ^ a b Passarotti, A.M.; Smith, J.; DeLano, M.; Huang, J. (2007). "Developmental differences in the neural bases of the face inversion effect show progressive tuning of face-selective regions to the upright orientation". NeuroImage. 34 (4): 1708–1722. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.07.045. ISSN 1053-8119.
  23. ^ Dahl, Christoph D.; Rasch, Malte J.; Tomonaga, Masaki; Adachi, Ikuma (2013-08-27). "The face inversion effect in non-human primates revisited - an investigation in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)". Scientific Reports. 3 (1). doi:10.1038/srep02504. ISSN 2045-2322. PMC 3753590. PMID 23978930.
  24. ^ a b Busigny, Thomas; Rossion, Bruno (2010). "Acquired prosopagnosia abolishes the face inversion effect". Cortex. 46 (8): 965–981. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2009.07.004. ISSN 0010-9452.
  25. ^ Grüter, Thomas; Grüter, Martina; Carbon, Claus-Christian (2008). "Neural and genetic foundations of face recognition and prosopagnosia". Journal of Neuropsychology. 2 (1): 79–97. doi:10.1348/174866407x231001. ISSN 1748-6645.
  26. ^ "The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms". Vision Research. 35 (14): 2089–2093. 1995-07-01. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(94)00273-O. ISSN 0042-6989.
  27. ^ Avidan, Galia; Tanzer, Michal; Behrmann, Marlene (2011). "Impaired holistic processing in congenital prosopagnosia". Neuropsychologia. 49 (9): 2541–2552. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.05.002. PMC 3137703. PMID 21601583.
  28. ^ van der Geest, J.N.; Kemner, C.; Verbaten, M.N.; van Engeland, H. (2002). "Gaze behavior of children with pervasive developmental disorder toward human faces: a fixation time study". Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 43 (5): 669–678. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00055. ISSN 0021-9630.
  29. ^ Behrmann, Marlene; Avidan, Galia; Leonard, Grace Lee; Kimchi, Rutie; Luna, Beatriz; Humphreys, Kate; Minshew, Nancy (2006). "Configural processing in autism and its relationship to face processing". Neuropsychologia. 44 (1): 110–129. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.04.002. PMID 15907952.
  30. ^ Falck-Ytter, Terje (2008). "Face inversion effects in autism: a combined looking time and pupillometric study". Autism Research: Official Journal of the International Society for Autism Research. 1 (5): 297–306. doi:10.1002/aur.45. PMID 19360681.
  31. ^ Hedley, Darren; Brewer, Neil; Young, Robyn (2014-10-31). "The Effect of Inversion on Face Recognition in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder". Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 45 (5): 1368–1379. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2297-1. ISSN 0162-3257.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Face_inversion_effect&oldid=843133943"