바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.23 No.3

Citation Share

Gender aftereffects from mental imagery of faces and individual differences

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2011, v.23 no.3, pp.355-373
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2011.23.3.004


& (2011). Gender aftereffects from mental imagery of faces and individual differences. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 23(3), 355-373, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2011.23.3.004

Abstract

Prior exposure to a specific gender changes perception of subsequent gender in face perception (gender aftereffects). The current study investigated the nature of gender aftereffects from visual imagery. We found that the ambiguous faces were categorized as male more often after visualizing male faces than after visualizing female faces. Seemingly this result suggests that imagery adaptation has the opposite effects as compared to perceptual adaptation. However, when individual data was separately analyzed, each participant was categorized into four distinctive groups depending on the direction of aftereffects. Specifically, some participants showed imagery aftereffects just like perceptual aftereffects, whereas others showed the opposite trends. This result suggests that the effects of imagery adaptation can be different depending on individual's ability to visualize. Therefore, individual differences should be considered when measuring the effects of imagery adaptation.

keywords
gender aftereffects, mental imagery, adaptation, face, 성별 잔여효과, 심상, 순응, 얼굴

Reference

1.

정일영, 이창현, 이미선, 정상철. (2009). 맥락 정보가 심적 회전에 미치는 영향. 인지과학, 20(4), 555-571.

2.

Bentin, S., Allison, T., Puce, A., & McCarthy, G. (1996). Electrophysiological studies of Face perception in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8 (6), 551-565.

3.

Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.

4.

Brandt, S. A., Stark, L. W. (1997). Spontaneous Eye Movements During Visual Imagery Reflect the Content of the Visual Scene. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 9 (1), 27-38.

5.

Chung, C., OH, K., Lee, Y., & Byun, H. (1998). Development of a “Gamsung” measurement system and a database for facial expressions and gestures (Tech. Rep. No. G-17-01-09). Korea: Ministry of Science and Technology.

6.

Cui, X., Jeter, C. B., Yang, D., Montague, P. R., & Eagleman, D. M. (2007). Vividness of mental imagery: Individual variability can be measured objectively. Vision Research, 47 (4), 474-478.

7.

DeBruine, L. M., Welling, L. L. M., Jones, B. C., & Little, A. C. (2010). Opposite effects of visual versus imagined presentation of faces on subsequent sex perception. Visual Cognition, 18 (6), 816-828.

8.

Eimer, M., Kiss, M., & Nicholas, S. (2010). Response Profile of the Face-Sensitive N170 Component: A Rapid Adaptation Study. Cerebral Cortex, 20 (10), 2442-2452.

9.

Farah, M. J. (1989). The neural basis of mental imagery. Trend in NeuroScience, 12 (10), 395-399.

10.

Finke, R. A. (1980). Level of equivalence in imagery and perception. Psychological Review, 87 (2), 113-132.

11.

Ganis, G., & Schendan, H. E. (2008). Visual mental imagery and perception produce opposite adaptation effects on early brain potentials. NeuroImage, 42, 1714-1727.

12.

Hurlbert, A. (2001). Trading faces. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 3-5.

13.

Jeffreys, D. A. (1989). A face-responsive potential recorded from the human scalp. Experimental Brain Research, 78 (1), 193-202.

14.

Kovacs, G., Zimmer, M., Banko, E., Harza, I., Antal, A., & Vidnyanszky, Z. (2006). Electrophysiological correlates of visual adaptation to faces and body parts in humans. Cerebral Cortex, 16, 742-753.

15.

Kosslyn, S. M. (1980). Image and Mind. Harvard University Press.

16.

Kosslyn, S. M., Ganis, G., & Thompson, W. L. (2001). NEURAL FOUNDATIONS OF IMAGERY. Neuroscience, 2, 635-642.

17.

Kreiman, G., Koch, C., & Fried, I. (2000). Imagery neurons in the human brain. Nature, 48, 357-361.

18.

Leopold, D. A., O’Toole, A. J., Vetter, T., & Blanz, V. (2001). Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 89-94.

19.

Leopold, D. A., Rhodes, G., Müller, K. M., & Jeffery, L. (2005). The dynamics of visual adaptation to faces. Proceedings of The Royal Society, 272, 897-904.

20.

Marks, D. F. (1972). Individual differences in the vividness of visual imagery and their effect on function. In P. W. Sheehan (Ed.), The function and nature of imagery (pp.83-108). NewYork: Academic Press.

21.

Michelon, P., Zacks, J. M. (2003). What is primed in priming from imagery?. Psychological Research, 67, 71-79.

22.

Moradi, F., Koch, C., & Shimojo, S. (2005). Face Adaptation Depends on Seeing the Face. Neuron, 45, 169-175.

23.

O’Craven, K. M., & Kanwisher, N. (2000). Mental Imagery of Faces and Places Activates Corresponding Stimulus-Specific Brain Regions. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12 (6), 1013-1023.

24.

Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Processes. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

25.

Pearson, J., Clifford, C. W. G., & Tong F. (2008). The Functional Impact of Mental Imagery on Conscious Perception. Current Biology, 18, 982-986.

26.

Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437-442.

27.

Rhodes, G., Jeffery, L., Watson, T. L., Jaquet, E., Winkler, C., & Clifford, W. G. (2004). Orientation-Contingent Face Aftereffects and Implications for Face-Coding Mechanisms. Current Biology, 14, 2119-2123.

28.

Rodway, P., Gillies, K., & Schepman, A. (2006). Vivid Imagers Are Better at Detecting Salient Changes. Journal of Individual Differences, 27 (4), 218-228.

29.

Ryu, J., Borrmann, K., Chaudhuri, A. (2008). Imagine Jane and Identify John: Face Identity Aftereffects Induces by Imageined Faces. PLos ONE, 3 (5), 1-8.

30.

Sakai, K., & Miyashita, Y. (1994). Visual imagery: an interaction between memory retrieval and focal attention. TREND in NeuroScience, 17 (7), 287-289.

31.

Schendan, H. E., Ganis, G., & Kutas, M. (1998). Neurophysiological evidence for visual perceptual categorization of words and faces within 150ms. Psychophysiology, 35, 240-251.

32.

Sekuler, R., & Blake, R. (2001). Perception. NewYork: McGraw-Hill.

33.

Shepard, R. N. (1978). The Mental Image. American Psychologist, 33, 125-137.

34.

Shin, K., Stolte, M., & Chong C. (2009). The effect of spatial attention on invisible stimuli. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysic, 71 (7), 1507-1513.

35.

Watson, T. L., Clifford, C. W. (2003). Pulling faces: an investigation of the face distortion aftereffect. Perception, 32, 1109-1116.

36.

Webster, M. A., & MacLin, L. H. (1999). Figural aftereffects in the perception faces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 647-653.

37.

Webster, M. A., Kaping, D., Mizokami, Y., & Duhamel, P. (2004). Adaptation to natural facial categories. Nature, 428, 557-561.

38.

Wichmann, F. A., & Hill, N. J. (2001a). The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1293-1313.

39.

Wichmann, F. A., & Hill, N. J. (2001b). The psychometric function: II. Bootstrap-based confidence intervals and sampling. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1314-1329.

40.

Winamer, J., Huk, A. C., Boroditsky, L. (2010). A motion aftereffect from visual imagery of motion. Cognition, 114, 276-284.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy