Reliability of composite-task measurements of holistic face processing

Ross, David A.; Richler, Jennifer J.; Gauthier, Isabel

doi:10.3758/s13428-014-0497-4

Cited by 51 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is well above the maximum expected correlations reported in previous studies that did observe a significant correlation between the holistic index and CFMT performance (DeGutis et al, 2013;Ross et al, 2014). Indeed, we do observe significant correlations with performance on the CFMT for d′ of all conditions individually (see Table 7), which is in accordance with previous findings (DeGutis et al,…”

Section: Absence Of a Relationship Between The Holistic Index And Cfmsupporting

confidence: 93%

General and specific factors in the processing of faces

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ability to recognize faces varies considerably between individuals, but does performance co-vary for tests of different aspects of face processing? For 397 participants (of whom the majority were university students) we obtained scores on the Mooney Face Test, Glasgow Face Matching Test (GFMT), Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) and Composite Face Test. Overall performance was significantly correlated for each pair of tests, and we suggest the term f for the factor underlying this pattern of positive correlations. However, there were large variations in the amount of variance shared by individual tests: The GFMT and CFMT are strongly related, whereas the GFMT and the Mooney test tap largely independent abilities. We do not replicate a frequently reported relationship between holistic processing (from the Composite test) and face recognition (from the CFMT)-indeed, holistic processing does not correlate with any of our tests. We report associations of performance with digit ratio and autismspectrum quotient (AQ), and from our genome-wide association study we include a list of suggestive genetic associations with performance on the four face tests, as well as with f.

show abstract

Section: Absence Of a Relationship Between The Holistic Index And Cfmsupporting

confidence: 93%

General and specific factors in the processing of faces

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While it is recognised that some facial composites induce stronger illusions than others (e.g., Richler & Gauthier, 2014;Ross, Richler, & Gauthier, 2015), little explanation has been offered for these differences. A better understanding of these differences might inform theoretical accounts; for example, it will be interesting to see whether image processing approaches (e.g.…”

Section: Not All Facial Composites Are Created Equalmentioning

confidence: 99%

The composite face illusion

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few findings in cognitive science have proved as influential as the composite face effect. When the top half of one face is aligned with the bottom half of another, and presented upright, the resulting composite arrangement induces a compelling percept of a novel facial configuration. Findings obtained using composite face procedures have contributed significantly to our understanding of holistic face processing, the detrimental effects of face inversion, the development of face perception, and aberrant face perception in clinical populations. Composite paradigms continue to advance our knowledge of face perception, as exemplified by their recent use for investigating the perceptual mechanisms underlying dynamic face processing. However, the paradigm has been the subject of intense scrutiny, particularly over the last decade, and there is a growing sense that the composite face illusion, whilst easy to illustrate, is deceptively difficult to measure and interpret. In this review, we provide a focussed overview of the existing composite face literature, and identify six priorities for future research. Addressing these gaps in our knowledge will aid the evaluation and refinement of theoretical accounts of the illusion.

show abstract

“…Because research on holistic processing has historically focused on group-level effects, many of these tests excel at capturing group effects , but lack the reliability necessary to measure individual differences (e.g., DeGutis, Wilmer, Mercado, & Cohan, 2013;Ross, Richler, & Gauthier, 2015). Individual differences work requires tests that produce reliable scores, which at a minimum means that the tests have good internal consistency.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Limited evidence of individual differences in holistic processing in different versions of the part-whole paradigm

Sunday

Richler

Gauthier

2017

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The part-whole paradigm was one of the first measures of holistic processing and it has been used to address several topics in face recognition, including its development, other-race effects, and more recently, whether holistic processing is correlated with face recognition ability. However the task was not designed to measure individual differences and it has produced measurements with low reliability. We created a new holistic processing test designed to measure individual differences based on the part-whole paradigm, the Vanderbilt Part Whole Test (VPWT). Measurements in the part and whole conditions were reliable, but, surprisingly, there was no evidence for reliable individual differences in the partwhole index (how well a person can take advantage of a face part presented within a whole face context compared to the part presented without a whole face) because part and whole conditions were strongly correlated. The same result was obtained in a version of the original part-whole task that was modified to increase its reliability. Controlling for object recognition ability, we found that variance in the whole condition does not predict any additional variance in face recognition over what is already predicted by performance in the part condition.

show abstract

Reliability of composite-task measurements of holistic face processing

Cited by 51 publications

References 33 publications

General and specific factors in the processing of faces

General and specific factors in the processing of faces

The composite face illusion

Limited evidence of individual differences in holistic processing in different versions of the part-whole paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About