Abstract

Background and aim of the study: Developmental prosopagnosia (DP) is defi ned asimpaired face recognition in the absence of brain injury or intellectual defi cit. Becauseof the complexity of validated face memory and perception tests, its online distributiongreatly improves the effectiveness and convenience of conducting research. Assessmentof DP occurrence in the Polish population concerning study sample collection andcharacteristics.Material and methods: An online questionnaire consisting of the 20-item ProsopagnosiaIndex (PI20) was administered to assess self-reported problems with face recognition.Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) and Glasgow Face Matching Test (GFMT)were applied to assess respondents’ face memory and perception. Additional data onrespondents’ gender, age and handedness were also obtained. All of the components werearranged together using Google Forms tool. Respondents were recruited via social mediaannouncements. The study was conducted from 1st January to 31st March 2019. Each ofthe respondents was provided with personalised results analysis, which was sent with ane-mail. They were also able to stay in contact with research authors, asking additional questionsand giving remarks.Results: During the study, a total of 1349 questionnaires were collected, out of which1276 met inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. 66.1% of the respondent groupwere females and 33.9% males. The mean age was 28.3 ± 9.5 years (range: 14-75). Themean PI20 score was 49.6 ± 18 (range: 20-99). In 11.8% of respondents PI20 result indicatedself-reported mild, in 8.3% moderate and in 3.9% severe DP. The mean CFMT totalscore was 58.1 (median: 59, range: 26-72) and mean GFMT score was 33.9 (median: 34,range: 18-40). According to the cutoff values from original papers, 81 (6.3%) of respondentsscored below threshold in CFMT, 27 (2.4%) in GFMT. Out of 50 respondents whoself-reported symptoms indicating severe DP, only 15 (30%) scored below the cutoff inCFMT and 6 (12%) in GFMT. On the contrary, 30 (3.1%) and 16 (1.4%) out of 970 respondentsreporting no problems with face recognition had total scores below the cutoff inCFMT and GFMT, respectively.Conclusions: The estimated prevalence of developmental prosopagnosia in Polishpopulation is higher than in normative data. These discrepancies may result from specifi cdemographics of participant group more than an online-character of the study. It is
 important to focus on experiment design and methodology in order to maintain high quality ofcollected data. Development of country-specifi c norms and stimuli for face-recognitiontests should also be considered .

Highlights

  • Developmental prosopagnosia (DP), sometimes referred as congenital prosopagnosia, can be defined as impaired face recognition in the absence of coexisting intellectual deficit or brain injury (Behrmann, 2005)

  • The estimated prevalence of developmental prosopagnosia in Polish population is higher than in normative data. These discrepancies may result from specific demographics of participant group more than an online-character of the study

  • Tant to focus on experiment design and methodology in order to maintain high quality of collected data

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Developmental prosopagnosia (DP), sometimes referred as congenital prosopagnosia, can be defined as impaired face recognition in the absence of coexisting intellectual deficit or brain injury (Behrmann, 2005). Prosopagnosia Index (PI20) is one of the most popular self-assessment questionnaires for DP screening (Shah, 2015). It consists of 20 items regarding difficulties in face processing in daily situations. Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) is the most widely known tool for detecting face memory impairment, characterised by its sensibility to a wide range of abilities (Duchaine, 2006). It has high internal and test-retest reliability (Bowles, 2009). Developmental prosopagnosia (DP) is defined as impaired face recognition in the absence of brain injury or intellectual deficit. Assessment of DP occurrence in the Polish population concerning study sample collection and characteristics

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.