2018
DOI: 10.1167/18.10.170
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Independent mechanisms for ensemble processing of face viewpoint and identity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To test this idea, future studies could first train participants to associate social information (e.g., self vs. other) with low-level features (e.g., Yin et al., 2019), and then explore the effect of self-construal on ensemble perception. Additionally, as suggested by Sama (2017), the different neural processing pathways recruited by high-level vs. low-level features might also partially explain their discrepant ensemble coding mechanisms, which require further study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…To test this idea, future studies could first train participants to associate social information (e.g., self vs. other) with low-level features (e.g., Yin et al., 2019), and then explore the effect of self-construal on ensemble perception. Additionally, as suggested by Sama (2017), the different neural processing pathways recruited by high-level vs. low-level features might also partially explain their discrepant ensemble coding mechanisms, which require further study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The first reason might be that an increment of set size resulted in different outcomes; particularly, for face-specific stimulus, increased set size meant increased heterogeneity, while for object-specific stimulus, increased set size usually produced by repeating set items (e.g., Ariely). The second reason for this dissociation, as suggested by Sama (2017), could be the distinct neural processing network underlying these two kinds of visual stimulus (Duchaine and Nakayama, 2005).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%