The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Detecting the Thatcher illusion in a case of prosopagnosia

Detecting the Thatcher illusion in a case of prosopagnosia
Detecting the Thatcher illusion in a case of prosopagnosia
We explored configural face processing in a prosopagnosic patient (PHD, Eimer and McCarthy, 1999) who does not produce an N170 is response for faces. In two sets of studies he was presented with two versions of the Thatcher illusion. In the first set, he was asked to detect Thatcherized from matched typical faces from successive single presentations of faces. He also performed a simultaneous 2 alternative forced choice (2AFC) discrimination task with the same stimulus set to address the question of whether pairs of faces were the same or different. In the second set he was asked to detect Thatcherized from matched typical faces. He also performed in control conditions where orientation decisions were made to isolated eye and mouth features, as well as eye and mouth features presented alone but within face outlines. The results were analyzed using d-prime and C to facilitate cross condition comparisons. The data showed PHD unable to detect Thatcherized from matched typical faces in either study 1 or 2. However, he was as sensitive as controls in the 2AFC discrimination condition of Study 1. In study 2 he showed evidence of moderate sensitivity to the identification of orientation for isolated features; this sensitivity was much enhanced for eyes by face outlines but hindered for mouths. We interpret these findings as showing intact feature processing that should be sufficient to allow the detection of the Thatcher illusion, as well as some evidence of relational processing for eyes but not mouths. However, simultaneous presentation of features and face outline does not allow selective attention to eyes that would enable detection of Thatcherized from matched typical faces. The results suggest one aspect of successful face categorization is to determine face-specific configural routines that allocate attention within faces and that these are missing in PHD.
557
Donnelly, Nick
05c83b6b-ee8d-4c9d-85dc-c5dcd6b5427b
Menneer, Tamaryn
d684eaf6-1494-4004-9973-cb8ccc628efa
Cornes, Katherine
fc4947d9-b3e9-4e08-b15a-80af5550f9eb
Mestry, Natalie
7f725141-430d-4118-a43d-943f6bae787f
McCarthy, Rosaleen A.
5377d3de-2597-4427-801b-6b4c61058568
Donnelly, Nick
05c83b6b-ee8d-4c9d-85dc-c5dcd6b5427b
Menneer, Tamaryn
d684eaf6-1494-4004-9973-cb8ccc628efa
Cornes, Katherine
fc4947d9-b3e9-4e08-b15a-80af5550f9eb
Mestry, Natalie
7f725141-430d-4118-a43d-943f6bae787f
McCarthy, Rosaleen A.
5377d3de-2597-4427-801b-6b4c61058568

Donnelly, Nick, Menneer, Tamaryn, Cornes, Katherine, Mestry, Natalie and McCarthy, Rosaleen A. (2009) Detecting the Thatcher illusion in a case of prosopagnosia. Vision Sciences Society. p. 557 . (doi:10.1167/9.8.557).

Record type: Conference or Workshop Item (Poster)

Abstract

We explored configural face processing in a prosopagnosic patient (PHD, Eimer and McCarthy, 1999) who does not produce an N170 is response for faces. In two sets of studies he was presented with two versions of the Thatcher illusion. In the first set, he was asked to detect Thatcherized from matched typical faces from successive single presentations of faces. He also performed a simultaneous 2 alternative forced choice (2AFC) discrimination task with the same stimulus set to address the question of whether pairs of faces were the same or different. In the second set he was asked to detect Thatcherized from matched typical faces. He also performed in control conditions where orientation decisions were made to isolated eye and mouth features, as well as eye and mouth features presented alone but within face outlines. The results were analyzed using d-prime and C to facilitate cross condition comparisons. The data showed PHD unable to detect Thatcherized from matched typical faces in either study 1 or 2. However, he was as sensitive as controls in the 2AFC discrimination condition of Study 1. In study 2 he showed evidence of moderate sensitivity to the identification of orientation for isolated features; this sensitivity was much enhanced for eyes by face outlines but hindered for mouths. We interpret these findings as showing intact feature processing that should be sufficient to allow the detection of the Thatcher illusion, as well as some evidence of relational processing for eyes but not mouths. However, simultaneous presentation of features and face outline does not allow selective attention to eyes that would enable detection of Thatcherized from matched typical faces. The results suggest one aspect of successful face categorization is to determine face-specific configural routines that allocate attention within faces and that these are missing in PHD.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 11 June 2009
Venue - Dates: Vision Sciences Society, 2009-06-11

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 157573
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/157573
PURE UUID: 58d4c9e5-21a7-4fe3-b303-ea08b01d0117

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Jun 2010 13:23
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 01:47

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Nick Donnelly
Author: Tamaryn Menneer
Author: Katherine Cornes
Author: Natalie Mestry
Author: Rosaleen A. McCarthy

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×