Neural Correlates of the Left-Visual-Field Superiority in Face Perception Appear at Multiple Stages of Face Processing

Yovel, Galit; Levy, Jerre; Grabowecky, Marcia; Paller, Ken A.

doi:10.1162/089892903321593162

Cited by 67 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Shorter latencies of face-specific N170 in the right hemisphere were reported by other authors (Yovel et al, 2003). The early match-mismatch effects in the Face task observed in the scalp-recorded ERPs in 200 -250 ms (Mnatsakanian and Tarkka, 2003) can be explained by differences in the activity of the sources 2, 4, 5, and 8 in our models.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

Familiar-face recognition and comparison: source analysis of scalp-recorded event-related potentials

Mnatsakanian

Tarkka

2004

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We studied the event-related potentials elicited by categorical matching of faces. The purpose was to find cortical sources responsible for face recognition and comparison.Methods: Nineteen healthy volunteers participated in the study. Each trial began with one of the two cues (S1) followed by consecutive pictures (S2 and S3). Each picture was a photograph of a familiar face with a superimposed abstract dot pattern. One cue directed attention to compare faces and another to compare patterns. 128-channel electroencephalogram was recorded. Spatio-temporal multiple dipole source models were generated using Brain Electromagnetic Source Analysis 2000, for the window of 80 -600 ms from S3 onset.Results: The obtained model for face recognition and comparison contained 8 dipoles explaining 97% of grand average and about 90% of individual data and showing temporal and spatial separation of sources: in the frontal region, in the occipital cortex, and in the bilateral medial temporal and inferotemporal regions. Different faces elicited larger components than same person's faces around 400 ms, mainly explained by frontal dipoles.Conclusions: The sources in our models estimate the activity common for both Face task conditions (the recognition of a familiar person) and also differential activity, related to the match/mismatch item processing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

Familiar-face recognition and comparison: source analysis of scalp-recorded event-related potentials

Mnatsakanian

Tarkka

2004

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In physiological studies using fMRI, right FFA was activated more than left FFA [23,24]. Using ERP and MEG, most subjects evoked larger components for face in the right hemisphere than the left [10,11,[25][26][27][28][29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Interhemispheric Difference for Upright and Inverted Face Perception in Humans: An Event-Related Potential Study

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) to investigate the interhemispheric difference of the N170 component for upright and inverted face perception in detail in fifteen healthy subjects. This is the first ERP study focusing on interhemispheric differences for face perception by showing faces in the hemifield. The face inversion effect, the prolonged latency and enhanced amplitude were found in both hemispheres. We found that the peak latency of the N170 following both upright and inverted face stimulation showed no significant difference between each hemisphere, though the N170 latency for the inverted face in the left hemisphere was shorter than that in the right hemisphere. The N170 recorded from the hemisphere ipsilateral to the stimulated hemifield showed unique findings. The interhemispheric time difference of the N170 between the right and the left hemispheres when the inverted face was presented in the left hemifield was significantly shorter than in the other three conditions. This unique finding may indicate that the conduction time from the right to the left for inverted face perception is faster than the other conditions, or that the left hemisphere specifically processed the inverted face very rapidly after receiving signals from the right hemisphere. If the N170 was generated by some, at least two, temporally overlapping activities, the different style of a summation of these activities may cause the unique findings found in this study. In conclusion, by presenting face stimuli in the hemifields, we could identify several new findings regarding the N170 component related to the face inversion effect.

show abstract

“…Second, most, if not all, acquired prosopagnosics follow either bilateral or right unilateral occipitotemporal lesions (Bouvier and Engel, 2006;Landis et al, 1988). Third, neuroimaging (Kanwisher et al, 1997;McCarthy et al, 1997;Rossion et al, 2012) and ERP (Bentin et al, 1996;Rossion et al, 2003;Yovel et al, 2003) studies have also demonstrated the right hemispheric dominance for face recognition.…”

Section: Interhemispheric Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying interindividual variability and asymmetry of face-selective regions: A probabilistic functional atlas

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Face-selective regions (FSRs) are among the most widely studied functional regions in the human brain. However, individual variability of the FSRs has not been well quantified. Here we use functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to localize the FSRs and quantify their spatial and functional variabilities in 202 healthy adults. The occipital face area (OFA), posterior and anterior fusiform face areas (pFFA and aFFA), posterior continuation of the superior temporal sulcus (pcSTS), and posterior and anterior STS (pSTS and aSTS) were delineated for each individual with a semi-automated procedure. A probabilistic atlas was constructed to characterize their interindividual variability, revealing that the FSRs were highly variable in location and extent across subjects. The variability of FSRs was further quantified on both functional (i.e., face selectivity) and spatial (i.e., volume, location of peak activation, and anatomical location) features. Considerable interindividual variability and rightward asymmetry were found in all FSRs on these features. Taken together, our work presents the first effort to characterize comprehensively the variability of FSRs in a large sample of healthy subjects, and invites future work on the origin of the variability and its relation to individual differences in behavioral performance. Moreover, the probabilistic functional atlas will provide an adequate spatial reference for mapping the face network.

show abstract

Neural Correlates of the Left-Visual-Field Superiority in Face Perception Appear at Multiple Stages of Face Processing

Cited by 67 publications

References 32 publications

Familiar-face recognition and comparison: source analysis of scalp-recorded event-related potentials

Familiar-face recognition and comparison: source analysis of scalp-recorded event-related potentials

Interhemispheric Difference for Upright and Inverted Face Perception in Humans: An Event-Related Potential Study

Quantifying interindividual variability and asymmetry of face-selective regions: A probabilistic functional atlas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About