바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 1226-9654

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.28 No.1
Citation Share

The effects of the presentation duration, presentation number, and face internal and external feature on Flashed Face Distortion Effect

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2016, v.28 no.1, pp.177-204
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.1.009


& (2016). The effects of the presentation duration, presentation number, and face internal and external feature on Flashed Face Distortion Effect. The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, 28(1), 177-204, https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.1.009
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The Flashed Face Distortion Effect (FFDE) refers to the face images look grotesque and distorted when they are presented quickly and continuously in the periphery of visual field (Tangen, Murphy, & Thompson, 2011). While Tangen et al. (2011) suggested that the relative encoding of facial components is responsible for the FFDE, this was not empirically tested. To test this, we conducted three experiments to investigate the conditions evoking FFDE. In Experiment 1, we investigated the effect of presentation duration, presentation number, and total time on the FFDE. In Experiment 2, we examined the effects of the spatial distance among internal features and repeated presentation on FFDE. In Experiment 3, we investigated the effects of change of the spatial distance among internal feature, the change of the shape of internal features, and whether the external features on FFDE are the same or different. The results showed that the effects of presentation duration and number were affected by the total time. The spatial distance among internal features and repeated presentation did not affect the illusion, However, we found the illusion was stronger in the condition that the spatial distance among internal features was smaller than the condition that the spatial distance among internal features was lager when the external feature was same. These findings suggest that the FFDE is connected with crowding effect rather than relative encoding among faces.

keywords
순간제시 얼굴의 왜곡 현상, 얼굴 구성요소, 제시 시간, 윤곽, 착시, Flashed Face Distortion Effect, internal feature, presentation duration, external feature, illusion

Reference

1.

김정훈, 김초복 (2004). 얼굴인식에서 전체윤곽-국소특징에 대한 선택적 뇌 활성화: fMRI 연구. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 16(3), 337-352.

2.

윤태웅, 정상철 (2013). 공간주파수가 인종 간 얼굴인식효과에 미치는 영향-양안경합 패러다임을 사용하여. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 25(2), 129-151.

3.

정우현, 이일우 (2012). 라인업 절차, 종족 및 성별이 얼굴 인식에 미치는 영향. 감성과학, 15(2), 307-316.

4.

Andrews, T. J., Davies-Thompson, J., Kingstone, A., & Young, A. W. (2010). Internal and external features of the face are represented holistically in face-selective regions of visual cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30(9), 3544-3552.

5.

Andrews, T. J., & Thompson, P. (2010). Face-to-face coalition. i-Perception, 1(1), 28-30.

6.

Anastasi, J. S., & Rhodes, M. G. (2006). Evidence for an Own-Age Bias in Face Recognition. North American Journal of Psychology, 8(2), 237-252.

7.

Baumgartner, G. (1960). Indirekte grössenbestimmung der rezeptiven felder der retina beim menschen mittels der Hermannschen gittertäuschung. Pflügers Archiv European Journal of Physiology, 272(1), 21-22.

8.

Crookes, K., & McKone, E. (2009). Early maturity of face recognition: No childhood development of holistic processing, novel face encoding, or face-space. Cognition, 111(2), 219-247.

9.

de Gelder, B., & Rouw, R. (2001). Beyond localisation: a dynamical dual route account of face recognition. Acta Psychologica, 107(1), 183-207.

10.

Farzin, F., Rivera, S. M., & Whitney, D. (2009). Holistic crowding of Mooney faces. Journal of Vision, 9(6), 18.

11.

Freire, A., Lee, K., & Symons, L. A. (2000). The face-inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: Direct evidence. PERCEPTION-LONDON-, 29(2), 159-170.

12.

Gold, J. M., Mundy, P. J., & Tjan, B. S. (2012). The perception of a face is no more than the sum of its parts. Psychological Science, 23(4), 427-434.

13.

Gregory, R. L. (1997). Knowledge in perception and illusion. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 352(1358), 1121-1127.

14.

Hills, P. J., Holland, A. M., & Lewis, M. B. (2010). Aftereffects for face attributes with different natural variability: Children are more adaptable than adolescents. Cognitive Development, 25(3), 278-289.

15.

Jarudi, I. N., & Sinha, P. (2003). Relative contributions of internal and external features to face recognition. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, 1-11.

16.

Leopold, D. A., O'Toole, A. J., Vetter, T., & Blanz, V. (2001). Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects. Nature neuroscience, 4(1), 89-94.

17.

Levi, D. M., & Carney, T. (2009). Crowding in peripheral vision: Why bigger is better. Current Biology, 19(23), 1988-1993.

18.

Lewis, M. (2004). Face‐space‐R: Towards a unified account of face recognition. Visual Cognition, 11(1), 29-69.

19.

Lobmaier, J. S., Klaver, P., Loenneker, T., Martin, E., & Mast, F. W. (2008). Featural and configural face processing strategies: evidence from a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroreport, 19(3), 287-291.

20.

Louie, E. G., Bressler, D. W., & Whitney, D. (2007). Holistic crowding: Selective interference between configural representations of faces in crowded scenes. Journal of Vision, 7(2), 1-11.

21.

Ma, D. S., Correll, J., & Wittenbrink, B. (2015). The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior research methods.

22.

Macho, S., & Leder, H. (1998). Your eyes only? A test of interactive influence in the processing of facial features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(5), 1486-1500.

23.

Martelli, M., Majaj, N. J., & Pelli, D. G. (2005). Are faces processed like words? A diagnostic test for recognition by parts. Journal of Vision, 5(1), 58-70.

24.

Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., & Mondloch, C. J. (2002). The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(6), 255-260.

25.

Meissner, C. A., & Brigham, J. C. (2001). Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(1), 3-35.

26.

Mondloch, C. J., Le Grand, R., & Maurer, D. (2002). Configural face processing develops more slowly than featural face processing. PERCEPTION-LONDON-, 31(5), 553-566.

27.

Pelli, D. G., & Tillman, K. A. (2008). The uncrowded window of object recognition. Nature: Neuroscience, 11(10), 1129-1135.

28.

Reddy, L., Reddy, L., & Koch, C. (2006). Face identification in the near-absence of focal attention. Vision Research, 46(15), 2336-2343.

29.

Reinitz, M. T., Morrissey, J., & Demb, J. (1994). Role of attention in face encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(1), 161-168.

30.

Richler, J. J., Cheung, O. S., & Gauthier, I. (2011). Holistic processing predicts face recognition. Psychological Science. 1-8.

31.

Sinha, P., & Poggio, T. (1996). I think I know that face... Nature, 384(6608), 404-404.

32.

Sporer, S. L. (2001). Recognizing faces of other ethnic groups: An integration of theories. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(1), 36-97.

33.

Suzuki, S. (2005). High-level pattern coding revealed by brief shape aftereffects. Fitting the mind to the world: Adaptation and after-effects in high-level vision, 2, 135-172.

34.

Suzuki, S., & Cavanagh, P. (1998). A shape- contrast effect for briefly presented stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(5), 1315-1341.

35.

Tanaka, J. W., & Farah, M. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46(2), 225- 245.

36.

Tanaka, J. W., Kiefer, M., & Bukach, C. M. (2004). A holistic account of the own-race effect in face recognition: Evidence from a cross-cultural study. Cognition, 93(1), 1-9.

37.

Tangen, J. M., Murphy, S. C., & Thompson, M. B. (2011). Flashed face distortion effect: Grotesque faces from relative spaces. Perception-London, 40(5), 628-630.

38.

Utz, S., & Carbon, C. C. (2015). Is the Flashed Face Distortion Effect expertise-based?-a systematic experimental investigation. Journal of Vision, 15(12), 147-147.

39.

Valentine, T. (2001). Face-space models of face recognition. In M. J. Wenger & J. T. Townsend (Eds.), Computational, geometric, and process perspectives on facial cognition: Contexts and challenges(pp. 83-113). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

40.

Webster, M. A., & MacLeod, D. I. (2011). Visual adaptation and face perception. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 366(1571), 1702-1725.

41.

Wei, H., Ren, Y., & Wang, Z. (2012). A group-decision making model of orientation detection. The 2012 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN), 1-8.

42.

Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2), 1-27.

43.

Zhao, L., & Chubb, C. (2001). The size-tuning of the face-distortion after-effect. Vision Research, 41(23), 2979-2994.

The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology

e-Submission OA Policy