Differences In Face Cognition Research Articles

Accurate but inefficient: Standard face identity matching tests fail to identify prosopagnosia

In recent years, the number of face identity matching tests in circulation has grown considerably and these are being increasingly utilized to study individual differences in face cognition. Although many of these tests were designed for testing typical observers, recent studies have begun to utilize general-purpose tests for studying specific, atypical populations (e.g., super-recognizers and individuals with prosopagnosia). In this study, we examined the capacity of four tests requiring binary face-matching decisions to study individual differences between healthy observers. Uniquely, we used performance of the patient PS (Rossion, 2018), a well-documented case of acquired prosopagnosia (AP), as a benchmark. Two main findings emerged: (i) PS could exhibit typical rates of accuracy in all tests; (ii) compared to age-matched controls and when considering both accuracy and speed to account for potential trade-offs, only the KFMT — but not the EFCT, PICT or GFMT — was able to detect PS's severe impairment. These findings reflect the importance of considering both accuracy and response times to measure individual differences in face matching, and the need for comparing tests in terms of their sensitivity, when used as a measure of human cognition and brain functioning.

Individual Differences in Face Cognition: A Commentary on Logie

Individual Differences in Face Cognition: A Commentary on Logie

Structural encoding processes contribute to individual differences in face and object cognition: Inferences from psychometric test performance and event-related brain potentials

The enhanced N1 component in event-related potentials (ERP) to face stimuli, termed N170, is considered to indicate the structural encoding of faces. Previously, individual differences in the latency of the N170 have been related to face and object cognition abilities. By orthogonally manipulating content domain (faces vs objects) and task demands (easy/speed vs difficult/accuracy) in both psychometric and EEG tasks, we investigated the uniqueness of the processes underlying face cognition as compared with object cognition and the extent to which the N1/N170 component can explain individual differences in face and object cognition abilities. Data were recorded from N = 198 healthy young adults. Structural equation modeling (SEM) confirmed that the accuracies of face perception (FP) and memory are specific abilities above general object cognition; in contrast, the speed of face processing was not differentiable from the speed of object cognition. Although there was considerable domain-general variance in the N170 shared with the N1, there was significant face-specific variance in the N170. The brain–behavior relationship showed that faster face-specific processes for structural encoding of faces are associated with higher accuracy in both perceiving and memorizing faces. Moreover, in difficult task conditions, qualitatively different processes are additionally needed for recognizing face and object stimuli as compared with easy tasks. The difficulty-dependent variance components in the N170 amplitude were related with both face and object memory (OM) performance. We discuss implications for understanding individual differences in face cognition.

Are event-related potentials to dynamic facial expressions of emotion related to individual differences in the accuracy of processing facial expressions and identity?

Despite a wealth of knowledge about the neural mechanisms behind emotional facial expression processing, little is known about how they relate to individual differences in social cognition abilities. We studied individual differences in the event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by dynamic facial expressions. First, we assessed the latent structure of the ERPs, reflecting structural face processing in the N170, and the allocation of processing resources and reflexive attention to emotionally salient stimuli, in the early posterior negativity (EPN) and the late positive complex (LPC). Then we estimated brain-behavior relationships between the ERP factors and behavioral indicators of facial identity and emotion-processing abilities. Structural models revealed that the participants who formed faster structural representations of neutral faces (i.e., shorter N170 latencies) performed better at face perception (r = -.51) and memory (r = -.42). The N170 amplitude was not related to individual differences in face cognition or emotion processing. The latent EPN factor correlated with emotion perception (r = .47) and memory (r = .32), and also with face perception abilities (r = .41). Interestingly, the latent factor representing the difference in EPN amplitudes between the two neutral control conditions (chewing and blinking movements) also correlated with emotion perception (r = .51), highlighting the importance of tracking facial changes in the perception of emotional facial expressions. The LPC factor for negative expressions correlated with the memory for emotional facial expressions. The links revealed between the latency and strength of activations of brain systems and individual differences in processing socio-emotional information provide new insights into the brain mechanisms involved in social communication.

Individual differences in face cognition: Within-person brain-behavior relationships and their between-person level correlates

Individual differences in face cognition: Within-person brain-behavior relationships and their between-person level correlates

Face cognition in humans: Psychophysiological, developmental, and cross-cultural aspects

Investigators are finding increasing evidence for cross-cultural specificity in face cognition along with individual characteristics. The functions on which face cognition is based not only are types of general cognitive functions (perception, memory) but are elements of specific mental processes. Face perception, memorization, correct recognition of faces, and understanding the information that faces provide are essential skills for humans as a social species and can be considered as facets of social (cultural) intelligence. Face cognition is a difficult, multifaceted set of processes. The systems and processes involved in perceiving and recognizing faces are captured by several models focusing on the pertinent functions or including the presumably underlying neuroanatomical substrates. Thus, the study of face-cognition mechanisms is a cross-disciplinary topic. In Russia, Germany, and China there are plans to organize an interdisciplinary crosscultural study of face cognition. The first step of this scientific interaction is conducting psychological and psychophysiological studies of face cognition in multinational Russia within the frame of a grant supported by the Russian Science Foundation and devoted to “cross-cultural tolerance”. For that reason and in the presence of the huge diversity of data concerning face cognition, we suggest for discussion, specifically within the psychological scientific community, three aspects of face cognition: (1) psychophysiological (quantitative data), (2) developmental (qualitative data from developmental psychology), and (3) cross-cultural (qualitative data from cross-cultural studies). These three aspects reflect the different levels of investigations and constitute a comprehensive, multilateral approach to the problem. Unfortunately, as a rule, neuropsychological and psychological investigations are carried out independently of each other. However, for the purposes of our overview here, we assume that the main factors that could influence the developmental, individual psychophysiological, and cross-cultural differences in face cognition are not only biological but also social and cultural. One of the principal tasks of this article is to draw the attention of psychologists to the physiology of face processing and to draw the attention of neuroscientists to the psychology of face cognition. Thus, the main goal of the article is to instigate a discussion among social psychologists, psychophysiologists, and neuroscientists about the mechanisms of face cognition, which, as in a mirror, reflect the basic, fundamental “psychophysical” problem of psychophysiology.

Neurocognitive mechanisms of individual differences in face cognition: A replication and extension

Face cognition performance is related to individual differences in cognitive subprocesses, as reflected in the amplitudes and latencies of event-related brain potentials (ERPs; Herzmann, Kunina, Sommer, & Wilhelm, 2010). In order to replicate and extend these findings, 110 participants were tested on a comprehensive task battery measuring face cognition abilities and established cognitive abilities, followed by ERP recordings in a face-learning-and-recognition task. We replicated the links of the ERP components indicating the speed of structural face encoding (N170 latency) and access to structural representations in memory (early repetition effect [ERE]/N250r) with the accuracy and speed of face cognition and with established cognitive abilities. As a novel result, we differentiated between the accuracy of face perception and face memory on the behavioral and electrophysiological levels and report a relationship between basic visual processes (P100 amplitude) and face memory. Moreover, the brain-behavior relationships for the ERE/N250r held true, even though we eliminated pictorial and perceptual structural codes from the priming effects by using backward masking of the primes with novel unfamiliar faces. On a methodological level, we demonstrated the utility of the latent difference score modeling technique to parameterize ERP difference components (e.g., ERE/N250r) on a latent level and link them to face cognition abilities.

Sex differences in face cognition

Although there is abundant evidence for female superiority in Face Cognition (FC), a number of questions regarding sex differences remain to be addressed. Here we report a reanalysis of data on the level of latent factors, modeled on the basis of an extensive test battery applied to three samples of over 800 adults in all. In independent samples the measurement structure of FC was invariant for both sexes, indicating that the measurement of the construct does not depend on the context variable sex, and investigating mean performance differences will not be biased by measurement issues — a neglected aspect in previous studies. We confirmed female superiority for face perception (FP) and face memory (FM). For the first time we could show that these sex differences prevailed after accounting for sex differences in broadly measured general cognitive functioning and in object perception. Across adult age, sex differences in FM increased due to the rapid decline of this ability in men, whereas performance in women remained stable across adult age. Self-reported social involvement and things-oriented activities moderated sex-differences in FM. Results show that sex differences are salient at the level of specific FC constructs and that they can be partially explained by social involvement.

Individual differences in face cognition: Distinct component abilities and basic neural processes

Individual differences in face cognition: Distinct component abilities and basic neural processes

Individual Differences in Face Cognition: Brain–Behavior Relationships

Individual differences in perceiving, learning, and recognizing faces, summarized under the term face cognition, have been shown on the behavioral and brain level, but connections between these levels have rarely been made. We used ERPs in structural equation models to determine the contributions of neurocognitive processes to individual differences in the accuracy and speed of face cognition as established by Wilhelm, Herzmann, Kunina, Danthiir, Schacht, and Sommer [Individual differences in face cognition, in press]. For 85 participants, we measured several ERP components and, in independent tasks and sessions, assessed face cognition abilities and other cognitive abilities, including immediate and delayed memory, mental speed, general cognitive ability, and object cognition. Individual differences in face cognition were unrelated to domain-general visual processes (P100) and to processes involved with memory encoding (Dm component). The ability of face cognition accuracy was moderately related to neurocognitive indicators of structural face encoding (latency of the N170) and of activating representations of both faces and person-related knowledge (latencies and amplitudes of the early and late repetition effects, ERE/N250 and LRE/N400, respectively). The ability of face cognition speed was moderately related to the amplitudes of the ERE and LRE. Thus, a substantial part of individual differences in face cognition is explained by the speed and efficiency of activating memory representations of faces and person-related knowledge. These relationships are not moderated by individual differences in established cognitive abilities.

Individual differences in perceiving and recognizing faces—One element of social cognition.

Recognizing faces swiftly and accurately is of paramount importance to humans as a social species. Individual differences in the ability to perform these tasks may therefore reflect important aspects of social or emotional intelligence. Although functional models of face cognition based on group and single case studies postulate multiple component processes, little is known about the ability structure underlying individual differences in face cognition. In 2 large individual differences experiments (N = 151 and N = 209), a broad variety of face-cognition tasks were tested and the component abilities of face cognition-face perception, face memory, and the speed of face cognition-were identified and then replicated. Experiment 2 also showed that the 3 face-cognition abilities are clearly distinct from immediate and delayed memory, mental speed, general cognitive ability, and object cognition. These results converge with functional and neuroanatomical models of face cognition by demonstrating the difference between face perception and face memory. The results also underline the importance of distinguishing between speed and accuracy of face cognition. Together our results provide a first step toward establishing face-processing abilities as an independent ability reflecting elements of social intelligence.

Supplemental Material for Structural Invariance and Age-Related Performance Differences in Face Cognition

Supplemental Material for Structural Invariance and Age-Related Performance Differences in Face Cognition

Structural invariance and age-related performance differences in face cognition.

Perceiving and memorizing faces swiftly and correctly are important social competencies. The organization of these interpersonal abilities and how they change across the life span are still poorly understood. We investigated changes in the mean and covariance structure of face cognition abilities across the adult life span. A sample of 448 participants, with age ranging from 18 to 88 years, completed a battery of 15 face cognition tasks. After establishing a measurement model of face cognition that distinguishes between face perception, face memory, and the speed of face cognition, we used multiple group models and age-weighted measurement models to explore age-related changes. The modeling showed that the loadings and intercepts of all measures are age invariant. The factor means showed substantial decrements with increasing age. Age-related decrements in performance were strongest for the speed of face cognition but were also salient for face perception and face memory. The onset of age decrements is apparent in the 60s for face perception, in the late 40s for face memory, and in the early 30s for speed of face cognition. Implications of these findings on a theoretical and methodological level are discussed, and potential consequences for applied settings are considered.