Validation of the Vanderbilt Holistic Face Processing Test

Wang, Chao-Chih; Ross, David A.; Gauthier, Isabel; Richler, Jennifer J.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01837

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Vanderbilt Holistic Processing Test for faces (VHPT-F, Richler et al, 2014) is the first standard test designed to measure individual differences in holistic processing, defined as a failure of selective attention. It shows convergent validity with the complete design of the composite test (Wang, Ross, Gauthier, & Richler, 2016). The VHPT-F typically achieves higher internal consistency (>.6) relative to various implementations of the composite task (e.g., DeGutis, Wilmer, Mercado, & Cohan, 2013;Ross, Richler, & Gauthier, 2015) by including trials that vary the size of the part that is selectively attended, thereby being more sensitive to a larger range of holistic processing in individuals.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

How holistic processing of faces relates to cognitive control and intelligence

Gauthier

Chua

Richler

2018

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Vanderbilt Holistic Processing Test for faces (VHPT-F) is the first standard test designed to measure individual differences in holistic processing. The test measures failures of selective attention to face parts through congruency effects, an operational definition of holistic processing. However, this conception of holistic processing has been challenged by the suggestion that it may tap into the same selective attention or cognitive control mechanisms that yield congruency effects in Stroop and Flanker paradigms. Here, we report data from 130 subjects on the VHPT-F, several versions of Stroop and Flanker tasks, as well as fluid IQ. Results suggested a small degree of shared variance in Stroop and Flanker congruency effects, which did not relate to congruency effects on the VHPT-F. Variability on the VHPT-F was also not correlated with Fluid IQ. In sum, we find no evidence that holistic face processing as measured by congruency in the VHPT-F is accounted for by domain-general control mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

How holistic processing of faces relates to cognitive control and intelligence

Gauthier

Chua

Richler

2018

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following training, participants performed a holistic processing test for each of the trained categories of novel objects using the VHPT-NO (Chua & Gauthier, 2018). The test was structured after the fashion of the VHPT-F (Richler et al, 2014), which is both more reliable to individual differences and more sensitive to average group effects than is the standard composite task but has been shown to tap into the same construct (Wang, Ross, Gauthier, & Richler, 2016). A separate test was used for each of the three trained categories: Sheinbugs, Greebles, and Ziggerins.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Domain-specific experience determines individual differences in holistic processing.

Chua¹,

Gauthier²

2020

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Holistic processing refers to the processing of objects as wholes rather than in a piecemeal, part-based fashion. Despite a suggested link between expertise and holistic processing, the role of experience in determining holistic processing of both faces and objects has been questioned. Here, we combine an individual differences approach with an experimental training study and parametrically manipulate experience with novel objects to examine the determinants of holistic processing. We also measure object-recognition ability. Our results show that although domain-general visual ability is a predictor of the ability to match object parts, it is the amount of experience people have individuating objects of a category that determines the extent to which they process new objects of this category in a holistic manner. This work highlights the benefits of dissociating the influences of domain-general ability and domain-specific experience, typically confounded in measures of performance or "expertise." Our findings are consistent with those in recent work with faces showing that variability specific to experience is a better predictor of domain-specific effects than is variability in performance. We argue that individual differences in holistic processing arise from domain-specific experience and that these effects are related to similar effects of experience on other measures of selective attention.

show abstract

“…Given that there is low reliability (around 0.2) for the standard composite face task (DeGutis et al, 2013; Ross et al, 2015), Richler et al (2014) proposed the Vanderbilt holistic face processing test (VHFPT) as a revised composite effect task. VHFPT has good reliability, around 0.4–0.7 (Richler et al, 2014; Wang et al, 2016). In addition, according to the tripartite model of self-construal (Brewer and Gardner, 1996), self-construction can be subdivided into independent/individual self, relational self, and collective self.…”

Section: Experiments 2: Self-construal Revised Composite Effect and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-Construal Priming Affects Holistic Face Processing and Race Categorization, but Not Face Recognition

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-construal priming can affect an individual’s cognitive processing. Participants who were primed with interdependent self-construal showed more holistic process bias than those who were primed with independent self-construal. The holistic processing of a face also differs across cultures. As such, the purpose of the present study was to explore whether the cultural differences in holistic face processing can be interpreted from the perspective of self-construal, as well as to investigate the relationship between self-construal and holistic face processing/face recognition/race categorization. In Experiment 1, participants were primed with control, interdependent, or independent self-construal, respectively, and then they completed a feature-space same-different task (Experiment 1A) or a composite face effect task (Experiment 1B). Results showed no priming effect in Experiment 1A, whereas independent self-construal priming resulted in less holistic processing in Experiment 1B. In Experiment 2, participants were primed with control, collective/interdependent, relational, or independent self-construal, respectively, and then they completed a Vanderbilt Holistic Face Processing Test and Cambridge Face Memory Test. Participants who were primed as independent showed greater congruency effect than the relational group. Self-construal priming had no effect on face recognition. In Experiment 3, we manipulated self-construal in the same way as that in Experiment 2 and monitored the eye movement of Chinese participants while they learned, recognized, and categorized their own-/other-race faces. Self-construal priming had no effect on face recognition. Compared with other groups, collective-/interdependent-self priming increased the fixation time of eyes and decreased the fixation time of nose in the race categorization task. These results indicated that the cultural differences in self-construal could not mirror the cultural differences in face processing in a simple way.

show abstract

Validation of the Vanderbilt Holistic Face Processing Test

Cited by 6 publications

References 45 publications

How holistic processing of faces relates to cognitive control and intelligence

How holistic processing of faces relates to cognitive control and intelligence

Domain-specific experience determines individual differences in holistic processing.

Self-Construal Priming Affects Holistic Face Processing and Race Categorization, but Not Face Recognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About