Second-order relational face processing is applied to faces of different race and photographic contrast.

Abstract

A large body of research suggests that faces are processed by a specialized mechanism within the human visual system. This specialized mechanism is made up of subprocesses (Maurer, LeGrand, & Mondloch, 2002). One subprocess, called second- order relational processing, analyzes the metric distances between face parts. Importantly, it is well established that other-race faces and contrast-reversed faces are associated with impaired performance on numerous face processing tasks. Here, we investigated the specificity of second-order relational processing by testing how this process is applied to faces of different race and photographic contrast. Participants completed a feature displacement discrimination task, directly measuring the sensitivity to second-order relations between face parts. Across three experiments we show that, despite absolute differences in sensitivity in some conditions, inversion impaired performance in all conditions. The presence of robust inversion effects for all faces suggests that second-order relational processing can be applied to faces of different race and photographic contrast.

Multiple latent variables but functionally dependent output mappings underlying the recognition of own- and other-race faces for Chinese individuals: Evidence from state-trace analysis

“…Therefore, based on Loftus et al (2004) ’s model, our findings supported the existence of FIE, which was caused by stimuli categories (different Y for faces and non-faces) rather than varying degrees of configural and featural strength utilization. Besides, our results also suggested that there was no difference in the inversion effect between own- and other-race faces ( Buckhout and Regan, 1988 ; Rhodes et al, 2006 ; Matheson et al, 2012 ).…”

“…As for inverted faces, several research found a larger FIE for own-than otherrace faces, implying the benefit of configural processing for own-race faces (Rhodes et al, 1989;Sangrigoli and de Schonen, 2004;Hancock and Rhodes, 2008;Megreya et al, 2011). Other studies, on the other hand, found that there was no difference in inversion decrement between own-and other-race faces (Buckhout and Regan, 1988;Rhodes et al, 2006;Matheson et al, 2012), or even that the inversion effect was larger for other-race faces than for own-race faces (Valentine and Bruce, 1986).…”

How Well Do Computer-Generated Faces Tap Face Expertise?

“…Despite little evidence regarding their validity, CG faces are being used to address important questions in face processing research. Examples include charting the developmental trajectory of face identity recognition [ 1 ], exploring the origins of race effects on face recognition [ 2 ], identifying the perceptual underpinnings of social judgements from faces such as trustworthiness [ 3 ], mapping the structure of face-space [ 4 ], investigating the types of faces for which there is special sensitivity to spacing between features in upright faces [ 5 ], and examining the category selectivity of neural responses to faces [ 6 ]. Results from such studies are being used to inform our understanding of how faces are processed and to develop and refine theories of face processing.…”