Unconscious familiarity and local context effects on low-level face processing: A reconstruction hypothesis
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Consciousness and Cognition 10 (4):503-523 (2001)
A common view in face recognition research holds that there is a stored representation specific to each known face. It is also posited that semantic or memory-based information cannot influence low-level face processing. The two experiments reported in this article investigate the nature of this representation and the flow of face information processing. Participants had to search for a particular primed face among other faces. In Experiment 1, the search was done in a context where distractors had either a different degree of fame or the same degree of fame. In Experiment 2, the target face was primed either with semantic information or without any information. Both experiments demonstrated that increasing the display set size lengthened face detection time. However, the lengthening was a function of face fame. The search context also had an effect on the slope of the famous face detection. The results are explained in terms of the idea that face representations are reconstructed and that high- and low-level information are integrated into the processing. The integration process is not a conscious one.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||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
Anne Treisman (1980). A Feature Integration Theory of Attention. Cognitive Psychology 12:97-136.
Martha J. Farah (1994). Neuropsychological Inference with an Interactive Brain: A Critique of the “Locality” Assumption. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (1):43.
J. W. Tanaka & M. J. Farah (1991). Parts and Wholes in Face Recognition. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 29 (6):520-520.
A. Mike Burton, Andrew W. Young, Vicki Bruce, Robert A. Johnston & Andrew W. Ellis (1991). Understanding Covert Recognition. Cognition 39 (2):129-166.
Edward E. Smith & Gerald D. Nielsen (1970). Representations and Retrieval Processes in Short-Term Memory: Recognition and Recall of Faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology 85 (3):397.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Hervé Abdi, Dominique Valentin & Betty G. Edelman (1998). Eigenfeatures as Intermediate-Level Representations: The Case for PCA Models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (1):17-18.
Natalie A. Wyer, Douglas Martin, Tracey Pickup & C. Neil Macrae (2012). Individual Differences in (Non-Visual) Processing Style Predict the Face Inversion Effect. Cognitive Science 36 (2):373-384.
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.
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.
Ewa Jakubowska (2010). Face: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
B. Khurana (2000). Face Representation Without Conscious Processing. In Thomas Metzinger (ed.), Neural Correlates of Consciousness. MIT Press
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.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #235,540 of 1,780,590 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #291,765 of 1,780,590 )
How can I increase my downloads?