David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
One’s own face possesses two properties that make it prone to grab attention: It is a face, and, in addition, it is a self-referential stimulus. The question of whether the self-face is actually an especially attention-grabbing stimulus was addressed by using a face– name interference paradigm. We investigated whether interference from a ﬂanking self-face on the processing of a target classmate’s name was stronger than interference from a classmate’s ﬂanking face on the processing of one’s own name as the target. In a control condition a third familiar face served as the ﬂanker for both decisions from the participant’s own name and from the classmate’s name. The presentation of the self-face as a ﬂanker produced signiﬁcantly more interference on the identiﬁcation of a classmate’s name than the presentation of that classmate’s face did on the identiﬁcation of one’s own name. This result was due to the interfering power of the self-face and not to a particular resistance of one’s name to interfering facial stimuli. We argue that the emotional value or the high familiarity of one’s own face may explain its attention-grabbing property.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
T. Montoute & G. Tiberghien (2001). Unconscious Familiarity and Local Context Effects on Low-Level Face Processing: A Reconstruction Hypothesis. Consciousness and Cognition 10 (4):503-523.
Ewa Jakubowska (2010). Face: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Laura A. Thompson, Daniel M. Malloy, John M. Cone & David L. Hendrickson (2010). The Face-to-Face Light Detection Paradigm: A New Methodology for Investigating Visuospatial Attention Across Different Face Regions in Live Face-to-Face Communication Settings. Interaction Studies 11 (2):336-348.
Simon Lumsden (2000). Absolute Difference and Social Ontology: Levinas Face to Face with Buber and Fichte. [REVIEW] Human Studies 23 (3):227-241.
Richard Huxtable & Julie Woodley (2005). Gaining Face or Losing Face? Framing the Debate on Face Transplants. Bioethics 19 (5-6):505-522.
Anna Stone, Tim Valentine & Rob Davis (2001). Face Recognition and Emotional Valence: Processing Without Awareness by Neurologically Intact Participants Does Not Simulate Covert Recognition in Prosopagnosia. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience 1 (2):183-191.
James J. Cappel & John C. Windsor (2000). Ethical Decision Making: A Comparison of Computer- Supported and Face-to-Face Group. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 28 (2):95 - 107.
Thomas L. Gwozdz (2010). Metaphysics and Ethics. International Philosophical Quarterly 50 (4):489-500.
Neil Sinclair (2012). Moral Realism, Face-Values and Presumptions. Analytic Philosophy 53 (2):158-179.
B. Khurana (2000). Face Representation Without Conscious Processing. In Thomas Metzinger (ed.), Neural Correlates of Consciousness. MIT Press
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads4 ( #383,052 of 1,700,235 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #206,271 of 1,700,235 )
How can I increase my downloads?