Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise
This paper reviews studies on the face inversion effect and expertise. It is suggested that the inversion effect be considered as evidence of specific processing in face recognition or expertise of the objects, which meet three prerequisites. Some disputes are also pointed out in the review. It i...
Збережено в:
| Дата: | 2014 |
|---|---|
| Автори: | , , , , |
| Формат: | Стаття |
| Мова: | English |
| Опубліковано: |
Інститут фізіології ім. О.О. Богомольця НАН України
2014
|
| Назва видання: | Нейрофизиология |
| Теми: | |
| Онлайн доступ: | http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/148377 |
| Теги: |
Додати тег
Немає тегів, Будьте першим, хто поставить тег для цього запису!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Цитувати: | Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise / J. Gong, Y. Zhang, Y. Huang, J. Feng, W.W. Zhang // Нейрофизиология. — 2014. — Т. 46, № 5. — С. 492-497. — Бібліогр.: 33 назв. — англ. |
Репозитарії
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| id |
irk-123456789-148377 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
irk-123456789-1483772019-02-19T01:30:41Z Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise Gong, J. Zhang, Y. Huang, Y. Feng, J. Zhang, W.W. Обзоры This paper reviews studies on the face inversion effect and expertise. It is suggested that the inversion effect be considered as evidence of specific processing in face recognition or expertise of the objects, which meet three prerequisites. Some disputes are also pointed out in the review. It is proposed that further studies should be addressed to the visual differences, physiological basis of cognitive modules, and anatomical and functional location of the respective networks. Надано огляд робіт, у котрих обговорюються ефект інверсії зображення обличчя та експертний підхід у процесі його аналізу. Вважається, що ефект інверсії має розглядатись як свідоцтво специфічної обробки інформації при розпізнанні обличчя або базуватися на експертній оцінці об’єктів з наявністю трьох передумов. В огляді виділені декілька аспектів, що викликають дискусії. Пропонується, щоб наступні дослідження були спрямовані на з’ясування візуальних відмінностей, фізіологічного базису когнітивних модулів та анатомічної та функціональної локалізації відповідних нейронних мереж 2014 Article Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise / J. Gong, Y. Zhang, Y. Huang, J. Feng, W.W. Zhang // Нейрофизиология. — 2014. — Т. 46, № 5. — С. 492-497. — Бібліогр.: 33 назв. — англ. 0028-2561 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/148377 612.821.2 en Нейрофизиология Інститут фізіології ім. О.О. Богомольця НАН України |
| institution |
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| collection |
DSpace DC |
| language |
English |
| topic |
Обзоры Обзоры |
| spellingShingle |
Обзоры Обзоры Gong, J. Zhang, Y. Huang, Y. Feng, J. Zhang, W.W. Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise Нейрофизиология |
| description |
This paper reviews studies on the face inversion effect and expertise. It is suggested that
the inversion effect be considered as evidence of specific processing in face recognition or
expertise of the objects, which meet three prerequisites. Some disputes are also pointed out
in the review. It is proposed that further studies should be addressed to the visual differences,
physiological basis of cognitive modules, and anatomical and functional location of the
respective networks. |
| format |
Article |
| author |
Gong, J. Zhang, Y. Huang, Y. Feng, J. Zhang, W.W. |
| author_facet |
Gong, J. Zhang, Y. Huang, Y. Feng, J. Zhang, W.W. |
| author_sort |
Gong, J. |
| title |
Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise |
| title_short |
Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise |
| title_full |
Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise |
| title_fullStr |
Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise |
| title_sort |
controversies in the facial inversion effect: face specificity and expertise |
| publisher |
Інститут фізіології ім. О.О. Богомольця НАН України |
| publishDate |
2014 |
| topic_facet |
Обзоры |
| url |
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/148377 |
| citation_txt |
Controversies in the Facial Inversion Effect: Face Specificity and Expertise / J. Gong, Y. Zhang, Y. Huang, J. Feng, W.W. Zhang // Нейрофизиология. — 2014. — Т. 46, № 5. — С. 492-497. — Бібліогр.: 33 назв. — англ. |
| series |
Нейрофизиология |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT gongj controversiesinthefacialinversioneffectfacespecificityandexpertise AT zhangy controversiesinthefacialinversioneffectfacespecificityandexpertise AT huangy controversiesinthefacialinversioneffectfacespecificityandexpertise AT fengj controversiesinthefacialinversioneffectfacespecificityandexpertise AT zhangww controversiesinthefacialinversioneffectfacespecificityandexpertise |
| first_indexed |
2025-07-12T19:15:41Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-07-12T19:15:41Z |
| _version_ |
1837469792096747520 |
| fulltext |
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY / НЕЙРОФИЗИОЛОГИЯ.—2014.—T. 46, № 5492
ОБЗОР
UDC 612.821.2
J. GONG,1 Y. ZHANG,2 Y. HUANG,1 J. FENG,1 and W. W. ZHANG1
CONTROVERSIES IN THE FACIAL INVERSION EFFECT: FACE SPECIFICITY
AND EXPERTISE
Received 02.09.13
This paper reviews studies on the face inversion effect and expertise. It is suggested that
the inversion effect be considered as evidence of specific processing in face recognition or
expertise of the objects, which meet three prerequisites. Some disputes are also pointed out
in the review. It is proposed that further studies should be addressed to the visual differences,
physiological basis of cognitive modules, and anatomical and functional location of the
respective networks.
Keywords: face recognition, inversion effect, face specificity, expertise.
1 Department of Neurology, General Hospital of Beijing Command, Beijing,
China.
2 Air Force Aviation Medicine Research Institute, Beijing, China.
Correspondence should be addressed to Y. Zhang
(e-mail: neuropsych@126.com).
Face recognition is currently one of the important
domains in cognitive neuroscience; this topic is
attracting more and more attention from many
neurologists and cognitive psychologists. As the facial
inversion effect (FIE) has been found to be evidence
of face-specific processing [1], it became one of the
important approaches in studies of face recognition
and it is still a hot topic in the field of cognition,
because it remains a great challenge in understanding
the nature of FIE [2] .
THE FIE AND FACE-SPECIFIC PROCESSING
Over 40 years ago, it was observed in behavioral studies
that face recognition is impaired disproportionally by
inversion of the view or image, which was reported
in Yin’s landmark paper and called the face inversion
effect (FIE) [1]. Yin suggested that the FIE may be
considered as evidence of specific processing in face
recognition. More importantly, studies of the facial
processing mechanisms were promoted by the FIE [2].
F i g. 1. Scheme of the face processing model proposed by Bruce and Young [3].
Р и с. 1. Схема моделі обробки ін фор мації щодо обличчя, запро понована Брюсом та Йогном [3].
structural
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY / НЕЙРОФИЗИОЛОГИЯ.—2014.—T. 46, № 5 493
CONTROVERSIES IN THE FACIAL INVERSION EFFECT
Among them, the most famous and classic cognitive
model has been proposed by Bruce-Young, in which
the first stage of facial processing is the configural
coding [3] (Fig. 1).
With the development of the technique of event-
related potentials (ERPs), this technology gradually
began to play an important role in cognitive
neuroscience, known as the “observing window of
the advanced functions of the brain.” ERP researchers
found a negative wave with a latency of approximately
172 msec, called N170. This is the most significant
negative deflection in the composition of ERPs,
related to face recognition and observed in the bilateral
temporal occipital regions [4] (Fig. 2). The N170
component, related to configural analysis of the facial
features, is considered a significant argument for face
specific processing independent of sex, age, or race,
which reflects the configural coding in the cognitive
model of Bruce and Young. It was reported that the
latency of N170 is often prolonged by face inversion,
while the amplitude of N170 is increased after such
operation [5]. These effects can also be observed in the
parietal region. A different wave of positive polarity
is simultaneously recorded in this location, and this
component is known as the vertex positive potential
(VPP). This effect is observed not only in adults but
also in pre-school children (3 to 5 years old) [6]. Some
magnetoencephalographic (MEG) studies reported a
weak but significant delay of the P1 component before
N170, which might demonstrate that FIE may occur
earlier, even at the level of P1 [7].
Kanwisher et al. [8] studied the cerebral cortex in
the course of face identification by means of fMRI
and found that the right fusiform gyrus is strongly
activated by face images compared with non-face
objects. Therefore, the fusiform gyrus is considered to
play an important role in face identification, and this
region was called the fusiform face area (FFA). There
are three bilateral visual cortices mainly involved in
face-specific activation and processing; these are the
occipital face area (OFA), fusiform face area (FFA),
and superior temporal sulcus (STS) [9] (Fig. 3). The
FFA is the most important area, and Kanwisher’s study
indicated that the main function of the FFA is general
detection of faces rather than identification of faces at
an individual level [10].
There is a very interesting and controversial study
on prosopagnosia in which patients, when confronted
F i g. 2. The N170 wave induced by presentation
of images of faces (1) and cars (2) [4].
Р и с. 2. Хвиля N170 у складі викликаних по-
тенціалів, індукованих пред’явленням зобра-
жень облич (1) та автомобілів (2) [4].
–120 µV
µV
120
–8
–6 1
2
–4
–2
0
–0.2 0.2 0.4 sec
2
4
6
8
Faces Cars
N170
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY / НЕЙРОФИЗИОЛОГИЯ.—2014.—T. 46, № 5494
J. GONG, Y. ZHANG, Y. HUANG et al.
with a face image composed of many non-face
objects, could figure out each object but failed to
perceive the entire face, while patients suffering from
pragmatagnosia could realize that the entire visual
stimulus is a face but could not identify the objects
that make up the faces [11]. In theory, the FIE would
not occur in patients with prosopagnosia; however,
different studies came to dissimilar conclusions. It
was reported that the FIE appears in patients with face
agnosia [12]. In contrast, Delvenne et al. failed to find
the FIE [13]. Furthermore, de Gelder and Rouw [14]
observed that patients with prosopagnosia recognized
inverted faces better than upright faces, which was
considered the FIE reversal [15]. The core question of
face recognition is: Is there a unique face processing
module, or are there separate neural mechanisms of
face processing? Although researchers found specific
activation in some brain regions with respect to faces
(e.g., the FFA), other researchers insisted that there
is no difference between face recognition and non-
face object recognition (with expertise). Both such
processes are characteristic of classification of a
subcategory in a relatively homogeneous category, and
mankind is the expert to complete the classification.
THE FIE AND EXPERTISE
In 1986, when Diamond and Carey [3] examined FIE
on images of human faces and dog “faces,” they pre-
dicted that if the factor of class familiarity makes
sense, canine experts would recognize upright dog
images more effectively than inverted ones. In other
words, the dog “FIE” would occur only in canine ex-
perts other than “normal” subjects. The above find-
ings proved the hypothesis that not only the FIE but
also the dog “FIE” occur in the canine experts. Dia-
mond and Carey explained that when canine experts
identify the dogs using configural information, they
possess the ability to distinguish subtle differences,
while novices must rely on the separate features of
dogs. The usage of configural information in experts
is impaired by inversion; therefore, both experts and
novices have no choice but discriminate the invert-
ed stimuli relying on separate features. Diamond and
Carey put forward three prerequisites for the FIE: (i)
in certain types of complex visual stimuli, all stimuli
have a common structure; (ii) some kinds of stimuli
can be discriminated from others by the relationship
between the components of these stimuli. These com-
ponents determine a common structure, which is also
F i g. 3. Location of the FFA and OFA in an fMRI image [4].
Р и с. 3. Локалізація зон FFA та OFA при функціональному магніто-резонансному скануванні (fMRI) [4]
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY / НЕЙРОФИЗИОЛОГИЯ.—2014.—T. 46, № 5 495
CONTROVERSIES IN THE FACIAL INVERSION EFFECT
known as a second sequence between features; (iii)
participants possess the expertise to use these char-
acteristics of the relationship. The cited study dem-
onstrated that the FIE can appear in the recognition
of any stimuli with common configuration with which
participants are very familiar. The FIE should not be
perceived as evidence of face-specific processing be-
cause this effect was found in the recognition of other
non-face stimuli, e.g., a scene IE or a body IE [16]. In
addition, it was reported that acquired learning has a
great impact on the FIE, which also corroborates the
expertise hypothesis to some extent [17].
The findings made in ERP studies showed that
the N170 component can also be incurred by some
non-face objects, including cars, chairs, glasses,
houses, dogs, birds, flowers, butterflies, or palms
[18]. Different types of expertise studied, e.g., birds
and cars [19], which were of the same cognitive
characteristics, such as the experts’ advantage
of visual short-term memory over novices, were
insignificant [20].There is a very special novel type
of the stimuli, called “greebles,” which is a series of
artificial objects manufactured by some regulations
[21]. Researchers observed no difference of the N170
in novices between inverted “greebles” and upright
“greebles.” At the same time, the N170 latency of
the experts of “greebles” was impaired by inversion,
which implies that prolongation of the N170 latency
might be induced by the deterioration of relational or
holistic information (precisely such information is the
goal of experts to obtain). In short, the IE is a symbol
of destruction in cognitive processing [22].
However, some researchers even think that there is
no difference in the cognitive mechanisms between
upright and inverted faces, as well as between face
images and non-face objects. Participants can obtain
such expertise of novel “greebles” by continuous
training, and they can process the upright “greebles”
configurally, while they recognize inverted “greebles”
featurally [23].
Thus, first, it is difficult to find an ideal paradigm
to avoid the influence of visual differences among
various visual stimuli.
The “face-specific processing” proponents insist
that behavioral and electrophysiological studies of
the FIE provide convincing evidence for face-specific
processing. When participants are presented with
face images, the N170 and VPP are often induced
simultaneously, which is considered an early sign of
face processing. By contrast, some researchers believe
that, compared with other objects, the so-called face-
specific component N170 is not enough to support
face-specific processing, because this wave may
simply reflect a low-level visual difference (such as
spatial frequency) between faces and other non-face
objects [24]. Meanwhile, the “expertise” supporters
believe that the N170 (N1) is an index of expertise
for certain types of objects, including the perception
of language [25]. In addition, other studies suggest
that processing of the face may begin at about 100-
120 msec. The P1 wave is often observed within this
period, and this component is more sensitive to the
faces [26]. On the contrary, it is also proposed that
the P1 might only reflect a low-level visual difference,
like the N170 component [27]. A more subtle
study demonstrated that the P1 reflects rough face
processing, while the N170 reflects more sophisticated
face recognition [28]. Further, many studies have
shown that the spatial relationship between local
features of faces is mainly influenced by the FIE
[29], but which one is more influenced by this effect,
features or configuration? There is no consensus
whether a visual difference between dissimilar stimuli
always constitutes the problem (such as color contrast)
[30]. Thus, the problem of visual difference is one of
the bottlenecks that hinder the development of visual
recognition studies.
Second, it is rather difficult to find ideal visual
stimuli to compare with faces.
“Expertise” proponents suggest that the IE can
occur in recognition of any types of visual stimuli,
which meet the three prerequisites of Diamond and
Carey. However, opponents point out that the so-
called appearance of the IE with respect to “non-face
objects” arises only because the latter have similar
changes of facial characteristics (facelike). So, face-
specific processing regions are activated by those
facelike stimuli that are only indicative of special face
processing [31]. In addition, although people possess
the expertise to recognize dogs, birds, or “greebles”
by training (training time is, naturally, limited), these
types of expertise cannot be compared with face
recognition, as Farah’s study [32] showed that a face-
specific innate neural mechanism seems to exist.
Third, the findings of the IE in patients with
prosopagnosia are inconsistent.
The reason why there are such different findings of
the IE scope about face agnosia is that the reaction
time is insufficient for correct measurements in many
experiments. Although some studies showed that
patients with prosopagnosia could recognize upright
and inverted faces, they failed to report the findings of
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY / НЕЙРОФИЗИОЛОГИЯ.—2014.—T. 46, № 5496
J. GONG, Y. ZHANG, Y. HUANG et al.
recognition of upright and inverted non-face objects
simultaneously. What’s more, the visual stimuli and
paradigms varied in different studies. In other studies,
most patients suffered from impairment of recognition
of general visual objects; thus, they might even be
unable to identify an extensive set of objects.
Fourth, the relationship between FFA and its
functional location is still unclear. For the role of
the FFA, there are still different opinions. Does it
represent the face-specific recognition module, or is it
merely a part of the networks involving general object
processing nets [33]? Compared with the demonstration
of the role of the right hemisphere in face processing
(both in adults and infants), there is a left-hemisphere
advantage of word processing. Word processing itself
is a special expertise, which seems to imply that even
if there are active regions of expertise, it is likely to
be multi-regional in distribution rather than a single
location. Therefore, further studies are needed to
address to the visual differences, physiological basis
of cognitive modules, and anatomical and functional
location of the respective networks.
Acknowledgments. This research was supported by grants
from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant
No. 31000461) and Beijing Natural Science Foundation (No.
7123230). We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers
for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.
The authors, J. Gong, Y. Zhang, Y. Huang, J. Feng, and
W. W. Zhang, have no conflict of interest.
Дж. Гонг1, Ю. Жанг2, Ю. Хуанг1, Дж.Фенг1, В. В. Жанг1
ПРОТИРІЧЧЯ ЩОДО ЕФЕКТУ ІНВЕРСІЇ ЗОБРАЖЕННЯ
ОБЛИЧЧЯ: СПЕЦИФІКА ОБЛИЧЧЯ АБО ЕКСПЕРТНИЙ
ПІДХІД?
1 Головний шпиталь командування Пекіну, Пекін (Китай).
2 Дослідницький інститут авіаційної медицини ВПС, Пекін
(Китай).
Р е з ю м е
Надано огляд робіт, у котрих обговорюються ефект інвер-
сії зображення обличчя та експертний підхід у процесі його
аналізу. Вважається, що ефект інверсії має розглядатись як
свідоцтво специфічної обробки інформації при розпізнан-
ні обличчя або базуватися на експертній оцінці об’єктів з
наявністю трьох передумов. В огляді виділені декілька ас-
пектів, що викликають дискусії. Пропонується, щоб наступ-
ні дослідження були спрямовані на з’ясування візуальних
відмінностей, фізіологічного базису когнітивних модулів та
анатомічної та функціональної локалізації відповідних ней-
ронних мереж.
REFERENCES
1. R. K. Yin, “Looking at upside-down faces,” J. Exp. Psychol.,
81, 141-145 (1969).
2. B. Rossion and A. Boremanse, “Nonlinear relationship
between holistic processing of individual faces and picture-
plane rotation: Evidence from the face composite illusion,” J.
Vis., 8, No. 4, 1-13 (2008).
3. V. Bruce and A. Young, “Understanding face recognition,” Br.
J. Psychol., 77, Part 3, 305-327 (1986).
4. B. Rossion and I. Gauthier, “How does the brain process
upright and inverted faces?” Behav. Cogn. Neurosci. Rev., 1,
No. 1, 63-75 (2002).
5. N. Sagiv and S. Bentin, “Structural encoding of human and
schematic faces: Holistic and part-based processes,” J. Cogn.
Neurosci., 13, No. 7, 937-951 (2001).
6. M. Picozzi, V. M. Cassia, C. Turati, and E. Vescovo, “The
effect of inversion on 3- to 5-year-olds’ recognition of face
and nonface visual objects,” J. Exp. Child Psychol., 102, No.
4, 487-502 (2009).
7. K. Linkenkaer-Hansen, J. M. Palva, M. Sams, et al., “Face-
selective processing in human extrastriate cortex around
120 ms after stimulus onset revealed by magneto- and
electroencephalography,” Neurosci. Lett., 253, No. 3, 147-150
(1998).
8. N. Kanwisher, J. McDermott, and M. M. Chun, “The fusiform
face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized
for face perceptionm,” J. Neurosci., 17, No. 11, 4302-4311
(1997).
9. J. V. Haxby, E. A. Hoffman, and M. I. Gobbini, “The
distributed human neural system for face perception,” Trends
Cogn. Sci., 4, No. 6, 223-233 (2000).
10. N. Kanwisher, P. Downing, R. Epstein, and Z. Kourtzi,
“Functional neuroimaging of human visual recognition,”
in: The Handbook on Functional Neuroimaging, R. Cabeza
and A. Kingstone (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge (2001),
pp. 109-152.
11. M. Moscovitch, G. Winocur, and M. Behrmann, “What is
special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on
a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but nor-
mal face recognition,” J. Cogn. Neurosci., 9, No. 5, 555-604
(1997).
12. D. Anaki, Y. Kaufman, M. Freedman, and M. Moscovitch,
“Associative (prosop)agnosia without (apparent) perceptual
deficits: A case-study,” Neuropsychologia, 45, No. 8, 1658-
1671 (2007).
13. J.-F. Delvenne, X. Seron, F. Coyette, and B. Rossion,
“Evidence for perceptual deficits in associative visual
(prosop)agnosia: A single-case study,” Neuropsychologia,
42, No. 5, 597-612 (2004).
14. B. de Gelder and R. Rouw, “Paradoxical configuration effects
for faces and objects in prosopagnosia,” Neuropsychologia,
38, No. 9, 1271-1279 (2000).
15. T. Busigny and B. Rossion, “Acquired prosopagnosia abo-
lishes the face inversion effect,” Cortex, 46, No. 8, 965-981
(2010).
16. D. A. Minnebusch, P. M. Keune, B. Suchan, and I. Daum,
“Gradual inversion affects the processing of human body
NEUROPHYSIOLOGY / НЕЙРОФИЗИОЛОГИЯ.—2014.—T. 46, № 5 497
CONTROVERSIES IN THE FACIAL INVERSION EFFECT
shapes,” NeuroImage, 49, No. 3, 2746-2755 (2010).
17. Z. Hussain, A. B. Sekuler, and P. J. Bennett, “Perceptual
learning modifies inversion effects for faces and textures,”
Vision Res., 49, No. 18, 2273-2284 (2009).
18. J. W. Tanaka and T. Curran, “A neural basis for expert object
recognition,” Psychol. Sci., 12, No. 1, 43-47 (2001).
19. L. S. Scott, J. W. Tanaka, D. L. Sheinberg, and T. Curran,
“A reevaluation of the electrophysiological correlates of ex-
pert object processing,” J. Cogn. Neurosci., 18, No. 9, 1453-
1465 (2006).
20. K. M. Curby, K. Glazek, and I. Gauthier, “A visual short-term
memory advantage for objects of expertise,” J. Exp. Psychol.
Human Percept. Perform., 35, No. 1, 94-107 (2009).
21. B. Rossion, I. Gauthier, V. Goffaux, et al., “Expertise
training with novel objects leads to left-lateralized facelike
electrophysiological responses,” Psychol. Sci., 13, No. 3, 250-
257 (2002).
22. B. Rossion, “Distinguishing the cause and consequence of face
inversion: The perceptual field hypothesis,” Acta Psychol.,
132, No. 3, 300-312 (2009).
23. I. Gauthier and M. J. Tarr, “Becoming a ‘greeble’ expert:
Exploring mechanisms for face recognition,” Vision Res., 37,
No. 12, 1673-1682 (1997).
24. B. Rossion, I. Gauthier, M. J. Tarr, et al., “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,
11, No. 1, 69-74 (2000).
25. A. M. Proverbio, M. D. Zotto, and A. Zani, “Greek language
processing in naive and skilled readers: Functional properties
of the Vwfa investigated with ERPs,” Cogn. Neuropsychol.,
23, No. 3, 355-375 (2006).
26. R. J. Itier and M. J. Taylor, “Effects of repetition learning
on upright, inverted and contrast-reversed face processing
using ERPs,” NeuroImage, 21, No. 4, 1518-1532 (2004).
27. E. Halgren, T. Raij, K. Marinkovic, et al., “Cognitive response
profile of the human fusiform face area as determined by
MEG,” Cerebr. Cortex, 10, No. 1, 69-81 (2000).
28. T. Nakashima, K. Kaneko, Y. Goto, et al., “Early ERP
components differentially extract facial features: Evidence for
spatial frequency-and-contrast detectors,” Neurosci. Res., 62,
No. 4, 225-235 (2008).
29. A. Sekunova and J. J. Barton, “The effects of face inversion
on the perception of long-range and local spatial relations in
eye and mouth configuration,” J. Exp. Psychol. Human
Percept. Perform., 34, No. 5, 1129-1135 (2008).
30. G. Yovel, “The shape of facial features and the spacing among
them generate similar inversion effects: A reply to Rossion
(2008),” Acta Psychol., 132, No. 3, 293-299 (2009).
31. Y. Xu, J. Liu, and N. Kanwisher, “The n170 is selective for
faces, not for expertise,” Neuropsychologia, 43, No. 4, 588-
597 (2005).
32. M. J. Farah, C. Rabinowitz, G. E. Quinn, and G. T. Liu,
“Early commitment of neural substrates for face recognition,”
Cogn. Neuropsychol., 17, No. 1, 117-123 (2000).
33. M. J. Tarr and I. Gauthier, “FFA: A flexible fusiform area
for subordinate-level visual processing automatized by
expertise,” Nat. Neurosci., 3, No. 8, 764-769 (2000).
|