The covert priming effect of faces in prosopagnosia

Barton, Jason J.S.; Cherkasova, Mariya V.; Hefter, Rebecca

doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000145772.77040.24

Cited by 31 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…'s impairment were gained by assessing her ability to process faces implicitly, that is, without awareness of the face identity. There is evidence that at least some, if not all, neurological patients who acquire prosopagnosia after brain injury covertly respond to the identity of faces they knew before injury (Barton, Cherkasova, & Hefter, 2004;De Haan, Bauer, & Greve, 1992;De Haan et al, 1987). In contrast, as reported with other prosopagnosics before her (Barton, Cherkasova, & O'Connor, 2001;Bentin et al, 1999; but see Jones & Tranel, 2001, for an exceptional case), we found no evidence for covert face identification in K.W.…”

Section: Face Processingcontrasting

confidence: 58%

Too Many Trees to See the Forest: Performance, Event-related Potential, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Manifestations of Integrative Congenital Prosopagnosia

Bentin

DeGutis

D’Esposito

et al. 2007

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

114

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neuropsychological, event-related potential (ERP), and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) methods were combined to provide a comprehensive description of performance and neurobiological profiles for K.W., a case of congenital prosopagnosia. We demonstrate that K.W.'s visual perception is characterized by almost unprecedented inability to identify faces, a large bias toward local features, and an extreme deficit in global/configural processing that is not confined to faces. This pattern could be appropriately labeled congenital integrative prosopagnosia, and accounts for some, albeit not all, cases of face recognition impairments without identifiable brain lesions. Absence of face selectivity is evident in both biological markers of face processing, fMRI (the fusiform face area [FFA]), and ERPs (N170). Nevertheless, these two neural signatures probably manifest different perceptual mechanisms. Whereas the N170 is triggered by the occurrence of physiognomic stimuli in the visual field, the deficient face-selective fMRI activation in the caudal brain correlates with the severity of global processing deficits. This correlation suggests that the FFA might be associated with global/configural computation, a crucial part of face identification.

show abstract

Section: Face Processingcontrasting

confidence: 58%

Too Many Trees to See the Forest: Performance, Event-related Potential, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Manifestations of Integrative Congenital Prosopagnosia

Bentin

DeGutis

D’Esposito

et al. 2007

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

114

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clinicians may confuse DP with the face-processing impairment seen in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (Wilson et al, 2010). Although two of our five participants with DP had a history of social isolation, language delay, or hyperlexia, none had been diagnosed with autism or had elevated Autism Quotient scores, and all were independent adults with normal relationships and successful jobs or careers (Barton et al, 2004a; Duchaine and Nakayama, 2004, 2006a). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impairments in the Face-Processing Network in Developmental Prosopagnosia and Semantic Dementia

Mendez

Ringman

Shapira

2015

Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Developmental prosopagnosia (DP) and semantic dementia (SD) may be the two most common neurologic disorders of face processing, but their main clinical and pathophysiologic differences have not been established. To identify those features, we compared patients with DP and SD. Methods Five patients with DP, five with right temporal-predominant SD, and ten normal controls underwent cognitive, visual perceptual, and face-processing tasks. Results Although the patients with SD were more cognitively impaired than those with DP, the two groups did not differ statistically on the visual perceptual tests. On the face-processing tasks, the DP group had difficulty with configural analysis and they reported relying on serial, feature-by-feature analysis or awareness of salient features to recognize faces. By contrast, the SD group had problems with person knowledge and made semantically related errors. The SD group had better face familiarity scores, suggesting a potentially useful clinical test for distinguishing SD from DP. Conclusions These two disorders of face processing represent clinically distinguishable disturbances along a right hemisphere face-processing network: DP, characterized by early configural agnosia for faces, and SD, characterized primarily by a multimodal person knowledge disorder. We discuss these preliminary findings in the context of the current literature on the face-processing network; recent studies suggest an additional right anterior temporal, unimodal face familiarity-memory deficit consistent with an “associative prosopagnosia.”

show abstract

“…Representative MRI scans are shown in Figure 1, and anatomic templates in Figure 2. More detailed case information on most of these subjects can be found in previous reports using the same subject identification numbers (Barton et al, 2004a,Barton et al, 2004b,Barton and Cherkasova, 2005.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The contribution of the fusiform gyrus and superior temporal sulcus in processing facial attractiveness: Neuropsychological and neuroimaging evidence

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current cognitive models suggest that the processing of dynamic facial attributes, including social signals such as gaze direction and facial expression, involves the superior temporal sulcus, whereas the processing of invariant facial structure such as the individuals' identity involves the fusiform face area. Where facial attractiveness, a social signal that may emerge from invariant facial structure, is processed within this dual-route model of face perception is uncertain. Here, we present two studies. First, we investigated the explicit judgments of facial attractiveness and attractiveness-motivated behaviour in patients with acquired prosopagnosia, a deficit in familiar face recognition usually associated with damage to medial occipitotemporal cortex. We found that both abilities were impaired in these patients, with some weak residual ability for attractiveness judgments found only in those patients with unilateral right occipitotemporal or bilateral anterior temporal lesions. Importantly, deficits in attractiveness perception correlated with the severity of the face recognition deficit. Second, we performed a functional magnetic resonance imaging study in healthy subjects that included an implicit and explicit processing of facial attractiveness. We found increased neural activity when explicitly judging facial attractiveness within a number of cortical regions including the fusiform face area, but not the superior temporal sulcus, indicating a potential contribution of the fusiform face area to this judgment. Thus, converging neuropsychological and neuroimaging evidence points to a critical role of the inferior occipitotemporal cortex in the processing of facial attractiveness.

show abstract

The covert priming effect of faces in prosopagnosia

Cited by 31 publications

References 38 publications

Too Many Trees to See the Forest: Performance, Event-related Potential, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Manifestations of Integrative Congenital Prosopagnosia

Too Many Trees to See the Forest: Performance, Event-related Potential, and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Manifestations of Integrative Congenital Prosopagnosia

Impairments in the Face-Processing Network in Developmental Prosopagnosia and Semantic Dementia

The contribution of the fusiform gyrus and superior temporal sulcus in processing facial attractiveness: Neuropsychological and neuroimaging evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About