scholarly journals Developmental changes in the processing of faces as revealed by EEG decoding

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inês Mares ◽  
Louise Ewing ◽  
Emily K. Farran ◽  
Fraser W Smith ◽  
Marie L Smith

AbstractRapidly and accurately processing information from faces is a critical human function that is known to improve with developmental age. Understanding the underlying drivers of this improvement remains a contentious question, with debate continuing as to the presence of early vs. late maturation of face-processing mechanisms. Recent behavioural evidence suggests an important ‘hallmark’ of expert face processing – the face inversion effect – is present in very young children, yet neural support for this remains unclear. To address this, we conducted a detailed investigation of the neural dynamics of face-selective processing in children spanning a range of ages (6 – 11 years) and adults. Uniquely, we applied multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) to the electroencephalogram signal (EEG) to test for the presence of a distinct neural profile associated with canonical upright faces when compared both to other objects (houses) and to inverted faces. Results revealed robust discrimination profiles, at the individual level, of differentiated neural activity associated with broad face categorization and further with its expert processing, as indexed by the face inversion effect, from the youngest ages tested. This result is consistent with an early functional maturation of broad face processing mechanisms. Yet, clear quantitative differences between the response profile of children and adults is suggestive of age-related refinement of this system with developing face and general expertise. Standard ERP analysis also provides some support for qualitative differences in the neural response to inverted faces in children in contrast to adults. This neural profile is in line with recent behavioural studies that have reported impressively expert early face abilities during childhood, while also providing novel evidence of the ongoing neural specialisation between child and adulthood.

2010 ◽  
Vol 69 (3) ◽  
pp. 161-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jisien Yang ◽  
Adrian Schwaninger

Configural processing has been considered the major contributor to the face inversion effect (FIE) in face recognition. However, most researchers have only obtained the FIE with one specific ratio of configural alteration. It remains unclear whether the ratio of configural alteration itself can mediate the occurrence of the FIE. We aimed to clarify this issue by manipulating the configural information parametrically using six different ratios, ranging from 4% to 24%. Participants were asked to judge whether a pair of faces were entirely identical or different. The paired faces that were to be compared were presented either simultaneously (Experiment 1) or sequentially (Experiment 2). Both experiments revealed that the FIE was observed only when the ratio of configural alteration was in the intermediate range. These results indicate that even though the FIE has been frequently adopted as an index to examine the underlying mechanism of face processing, the emergence of the FIE is not robust with any configural alteration but dependent on the ratio of configural alteration.


Perception ◽  
10.1068/p3012 ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejo Freire ◽  
Kang Lee ◽  
Lawrence A Symons

We report four experiments leading to conclusions that: (i) the face-inversion effect is mainly due to the deficits in processing of configural information from inverted faces; and (ii) this effect occurs primarily at the encoding stage of face processing, rather than at the storage stage. In experiment 1, participants discriminated upright faces differing primarily in configuration with 81% accuracy. Participants viewing the same faces presented upside down scored only 55%. In experiment 2, the corresponding discrimination rates for faces differing mainly in featural information were 91% (upright) and 90% (inverted). In experiments 3 and 4, the same faces were used in a memory paradigm. In experiment 3, a delayed matching-to-sample task was used, in which upright-face pairs differed either in configuration or features. Recognition rates were comparable to those for the corresponding upright faces in the discrimination tasks in experiments 1 and 2. However, there was no effect of delay (1 s, 5 s, or 10 s). In experiment 4, we repeated experiment 3, this time with inverted faces. Results were comparable to those of inverted conditions in experiments 1 and 2, and again there was no effect of delay. Together these results suggest that an ‘encoding bottleneck’ for configural information may be responsible for the face-inversion effect in particular, and memory for faces in general.


2013 ◽  
Vol 142 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Hills ◽  
Rachel E. Cooper ◽  
J. Michael Pake

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ciro Civile ◽  
Samantha Quaglia ◽  
Emika Waguri ◽  
Maddy Ward ◽  
Rossy McLaren ◽  
...  

AbstractWe believe we are now in a position to answer the question, "Are faces special?" inasmuch as this applies to the face inversion effect (better performance for upright vs inverted faces). Using a double-blind, between-subject design, in two experiments (n = 96) we applied a specific tDCS procedure targeting the Fp3 area while participants performed a matching-task with faces (Experiment 1a) or checkerboards from a familiar prototype-defined category (Experiment 1b). Anodal tDCS eliminated the checkerboard inversion effect reliably obtained in the sham group, but only reduced it for faces (although the reduction was significant). Thus, there is a component to the face inversion effect that we are not affecting with a tDCS procedure that can eliminate the checkerboard inversion effect. We suggest that the reduction reflects the loss of an expertise-based component in the face inversion effect, and the residual is due to a face-specific component of that effect.


2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 619-619
Author(s):  
C. Jacques ◽  
B. Rossion

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document