Adaptive face space coding in congenital prosopagnosia: Typical figural aftereffects but abnormal identity aftereffects

Palermo, Romina; Rivolta, Davide; Wilson, Cassandra; Jeffery, Linda

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.09.039

Cited by 58 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our famous face task was the MACCS Famous Face Test 2008 (MFFT-08; Palermo, Rivolta, Wilson, & Jeffery, 2011b;Palermo, Willis, et al, 2011;Rivolta et al, in press). This uses faces famous in Australia and measures accuracy for naming (or providing other identifying information about) 20 famous faces as a percentage of the number of the famous people familiar to participants from their names.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Face ethnicity and measurement reliability affect face recognition performance in developmental prosopagnosia: Evidence from the Cambridge Face Memory Test–Australian

McKone

Hall

Pidcock

et al. 2011

Cognitive Neuropsychology

Self Cite

108

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT, Duchaine & Nakayama, 2006) provides a validated format for testing novel face learning and has been a crucial instrument in the diagnosis of developmental prosopagnosia. Yet, some individuals who report everyday face recognition symptoms consistent with prosopagnosia, and are impaired on famous face tasks, perform normally on the CFMT. Possible reasons include measurement error, CFMT assessment of memory only at short delays, and a face set whose ethnicity is matched to only some Caucasian groups. We develop the "CFMT-Australian" (CFMT-Aus), which complements the CFMT-original by using ethnicity better matched to a different European subpopulation. Results confirm reliability (.88) and validity (convergent, divergent using cars, inversion effects). We show that face ethnicity within a race has subtle but clear effects on face processing even in normal participants (includes cross-over interaction for face ethnicity by perceiver country of origin in distinctiveness ratings). We show that CFMT-Aus clarifies diagnosis of prosopagnosia in 6 previously ambiguous cases. In 3 cases, this appears due to the better ethnic match to prosopagnosics. We also show that face memory at short (<3-min), 20-min, and 24-hr delays taps overlapping processes in normal participants. There is some suggestion that a form of prosopagnosia may exist that is long delay only and/or reflects failure to benefit from face repetition.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Face ethnicity and measurement reliability affect face recognition performance in developmental prosopagnosia: Evidence from the Cambridge Face Memory Test–Australian

McKone

Hall

Pidcock

et al. 2011

Cognitive Neuropsychology

Self Cite

108

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the lack of an N170 inversion effect is also found in autism and Williams Syndrome (Towler and Eimer, 2012). Additionally, both individuals with autism and those with DP show dysfunctional face adaptation effects (Pellicano et al, 2007; Palermo et al, 2011). This may suggest that these disorders share a common abnormal developmental trajectory.…”

Section: How Do Treatments Improve Face Processing More In Dps More Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in contrast to autism and Williams Syndrome that are defined in part by marked social differences, DPs show more typical social behavior. For example, it has been shown that DPs attend to the eye region as much as healthy controls (DeGutis et al, 2012b), and that many can efficiently recognize emotion (Palermo et al, 2011; though see Le Grand et al, 2006) and gender (DeGutis et al, 2012a; though see Kress and Daum, 2003) from faces. Furthermore, evidence suggests that holistic face processing is a core deficit in DP (DeGutis et al, 2012b; as well as acquired prosopagnosia, see Busigny et al, 2014) while this is not the case with autism (see Weigelt et al, 2012 for a review) or Williams syndrome (Bellugi et al, 2000).…”

Section: How Do Treatments Improve Face Processing More In Dps More Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More rarely, prosopagnosia is caused by acquired brain injury that damages occipital-temporal or anterior temporal regions (Barton, 2008). Though developmental and acquired prosopagnosics may have more or less severe perceptual deficits, they all generally have difficulties with building a rich holistic face representation sufficient for face identification (Bukach et al, 2006; Ramon et al, 2010; Avidan et al, 2011; Palermo et al, 2011; DeGutis et al, 2012b). Instead, prosopagnosics attempt to learn and recognize faces using a less effective piecemeal approach, or rely on non-facial cues such as voice and clothing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Face processing improvements in prosopagnosia: successes and failures over the last 50 years

DeGutis

Chiu

Grosso

et al. 2014

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinicians and researchers have widely believed that face processing cannot be improved in prosopagnosia. Though more than a dozen reported studies have attempted to enhance face processing in prosopagnosics over the last 50 years, evidence for effective treatment approaches has only begun to emerge. Here, we review the current literature on spontaneous recovery in acquired prosopagnosia (AP), as well as treatment attempts in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia (DP), differentiating between compensatory and remedial approaches. We find that for AP, rather than remedial methods, strategic compensatory training such as verbalizing distinctive facial features has shown to be the most effective approach (despite limited evidence of generalization). In children with DP, compensatory training has also shown some effectiveness. In adults with DP, two recent larger-scale studies, one using remedial training and another administering oxytocin, have demonstrated group-level improvements and evidence of generalization. These results suggest that DPs, perhaps because of their more intact face processing infrastructure, may benefit more from treatments targeting face processing than APs.

show abstract

“…These findings and several subsequent extensions of the anti-face paradigm (e.g., Jeffery et al, 2010; Leopold & Bondar, 2005; Rhodes & Jeffery, 2006) have lead to a widespread acceptance of the norm-based account of face representation (e.g., Griffin, McOwan, & Johnston, 2011; Jeffery et al, 2010; Leopold & Bondar, 2005; Leopold et al, 2001; Nishimura et al 2010; Nishimura et al, 2008; Nishimura, Robertson, & Maurer, 2011; Palermo et al, 2011; Pellicano et al, 2007; Rhodes & Jaquet, 2011; Rhodes, et al, 2011; Rhodes & Jeffery, 2006; Rhodes & Leopold, 2011; Rhodes et al, 2005; Rhodes et al, 2010; Robbins, McKone, & Edwards, 2007; Short, Hatry, & Mondloch, 2011; Susilo, McKone, & Edwards, 2010a; Susilo, McKone, & Edwards, 2010b; Tsao & Freiwald, 2006). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not just the norm: Exemplar-based models also predict face aftereffects

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The face recognition literature has considered two competing accounts of how faces are represented within the visual system: Exemplar-based models assume that faces are represented via their similarity to exemplars of previously experienced faces, while norm-based models assume that faces are represented with respect to their deviation from an average face, or norm. Face identity aftereffects have been taken as compelling evidence in favor of a norm-based account over an exemplar-based account. After a relatively brief period of adaptation to an adaptor face, the perceived identity of a test face is shifted towards a face with opposite attributes to the adaptor, suggesting an explicit psychological representation of the norm. Surprisingly, despite near universal recognition that face identity aftereffects imply norm-based coding, there have been no published attempts to simulate the predictions of norm- and exemplar-based models in face adaptation paradigms. Here we implemented and tested variations of norm and exemplar models. Contrary to common claims, our simulations revealed that both an exemplar-based model and a version of a two-pool norm-based model, but not a traditional norm-based model, predict face identity aftereffects following face adaptation.

show abstract

Adaptive face space coding in congenital prosopagnosia: Typical figural aftereffects but abnormal identity aftereffects

Cited by 58 publications

References 70 publications

Face ethnicity and measurement reliability affect face recognition performance in developmental prosopagnosia: Evidence from the Cambridge Face Memory Test–Australian

Face ethnicity and measurement reliability affect face recognition performance in developmental prosopagnosia: Evidence from the Cambridge Face Memory Test–Australian

Face processing improvements in prosopagnosia: successes and failures over the last 50 years

Not just the norm: Exemplar-based models also predict face aftereffects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About