No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
The effects of varying configuration in the composite task support an attentional account of holistic processing
... Recall that Richler et al. (2013) have explained away a similar inconsistency between the composite face effect and the Garner interference as resulting from the absence of trial-to-trial configural changes in the Garner paradigm. However, this explanation cannot account for the present results. ...
... ‡ = p < .001 same-different task with a large number of faces and a great deal of trial-to-trial configural variability (Richler et al., 2013). Note that this design encourages super-capacity and holistic processing as observers must process both face parts coming from the same identity. ...
Composite faces fuse the top half of one face with the bottom half of another. These stimuli inflict a strong illusion of a novel face on their viewers, and are often considered to be processed holistically. The current study challenges this holistic view. Here I present provocative evidence from various classic attention paradigms such as the Garner (1974) and the redundant target (Miller, Cognitive Psychology, 14, 247-279, 1982; Townsend & Nozawa, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 39, 321-359, 1995) tasks showing that face parts are perceived and processed in an analytic rather than holistic fashion. In Experiment 1, composite faces failed to exhibit Garner interference, indicating perfect selective attention to the constituent parts. In Experiments 2 and 3, composite faces failed to exhibit super-capacity with same-identity composites, demonstrating limited or unlimited capacity. This pattern is consistent with analytic perception. Taken together, the results cast serious doubts on the validity of the holistic processing approach. In many respects, the study proposes disillusionment from the composite face illusion. In addition, the study highlights the importance of converging operations, model testability, and individual differences in the study of faces.
... A vast literature surrounding faces exists and there have been many studies carried out with conflicting and often contradictory results when it comes to conclusions around configural, componential or holistic processing of faces (e.g., Richler et al., 2013;Richler & Gauthier, 2014;Fitousi, 2015). Moreover, the results of using the GI paradigm have often been seen to contradict each other (Burns, 2014). ...
This cover sheet must be attached to the dissertation) Student ID 2933558 Supervisor Dr Stephen Langton Module Code PSYPDIP Dissertation Title I see you: Is the Garner Interference task suitable for use in the configural versus componential paradigm of face recognition and does this translate to an online environment? Word Count 5710 Tailored feedback. If you would like tailored feedback on a specific aspect (or aspects) of your work (e.g., referencing, writing style, grammar), then please give details here. Checklist Chec k √ I have included an Ethics Statement, indicating that I have followed BPS Guidelines. √ I have included a statement to say this is my own work/or clearly identified collaborations and shared data. √ I have specified that data ownership issues have been discussed with the owner and my supervisor. √ I have not listed my name but my Dissertation is anonymous (student number not name). √ My Dissertation is formatted correctly (double-spaced and at size 12 font). √ Declaration (a) I understand the British Psychological Society's Regulations with regard to Ethics and I have duly followed the required procedures. (b) Work which is submitted for assessment must be your own work. All students should note that the University has a formal policy on plagiarism which can be found at http://www.quality.stir.ac.uk/ac-policy/assessment.php (c) I declare that the work which has been submitted for assessment is my own and I have read and understood the University's formal policy on Plagiarism. (Your name will be removed prior to coursework being marked) 2 Signed _______________________________ 29th August 2021 Date ______________________________ 3 I see you: Is the Garner Interference task suitable for use in the configural versus componential paradigm of face recognition and does this translate to an online environment? Acknowledgements Thank you to all the participants who undertook the experiment in this study and to Dr Stephen Langton for his helpful comments and insights. Abstract The ideas around component and configural concepts of face recognition and the relative contributions of each have been debated within the literature and are seen as controversial (Amishav & Kimchi, 2010; Dyson & Quinlan, 2010). This has been interrogated using the seemingly standard paradigm of Garner's speeded classification (Garner, 1974) and the resulting Garner Interference (GI), which has been used in many studies in the past. Here we shall concentrate on the aspects of face perception and recognition in the context of components (noses, eyes, mouths) and configuration (where the components are in relation to each other, specifically inter eyes and nose to mouth spacing). This was carried out using a test-retest method in order to understand the reliability of the GI task as a suitable tool within this particular face recognition paradigm. That is, to examine if the Garner interference paradigm gives consistent results on two occasions and hence the implication being that it is a good tool to use within this specific paradigm. This also has implications for the role of individual differences within face recognition and processing. Essentially, is GI a reliable and consistent tool to measure people's configural & componential abilities and does this reveal anything about individual differences? A further consideration is how this, a traditionally lab based task, is carried out in a purely online environment and does this have a role in the outcome? Moderate positive correlations were found for both featural and configural Garner interference between the two sessions, however, the results may be confounded due to practice and randomisation effects, which are discussed. 4
... Most of these definitions do not converge (Fitousi, 2015;Rezlescu et al., 2017). For example, when tested in Garner's speeded classification paradigm (Garner, 1974), top and bottom parts of composite faces appear as separable rather than integral dimensions (Pomerantz et al., 2003;Richler et al., 2013;Fitousi, 2015). Similarly, under matched discriminability, global and local dimensions in Navon figures, are found to be separable (non-interacting) (Pomerantz, 1983). ...
Navon letters and composite faces are two fascinating demonstrations of hierarchical organization in perception. Many researchers believe that the two types of stimuli and their associated tasks gauge comparable holistic mechanisms. This belief is so common that the two paradigms are now being applied in tandem to measure impaired holistic processing in prosopagnosic patients. But are Navon letters and composite faces processed in a similar fashion? In the present study we take a closer look at their apparent affinity. We gain novel insights into their underlying mechanisms by fitting parameters of the linear ballistic accumulator (LBA) model to empirical correct and incorrect response times (RTs). The results reveal major differences in processing between the two tasks. We conclude that despite the presence of a compelling surface similarity, Navon compound letters and composite faces tap into separate psychological processes.
... For example, Fitousi (2015) deployed the Garner paradigm (Garner, 1974; for review see Algom & Fitousi, 2016)-a classic measure of holistic processing-to test the integrality of top and bottom halves in composite faces. He found no interference between the two components, a result that supported their separability (see also Amishav & Kimchi, 2010;Pomerantz et al., 2003;Richler et al., 2013). ...
Composite faces fuse the top and bottom halves from two different faces to create a powerful illusion of a novel face.
It has been argued that composite faces are processed holistically, namely that the constituent face parts are perceived
as a template, rather than independent features. This study sought to uncover the locus of the composite face effect
by relating its empirical reaction time distributions to theoretical ex-Gaussian parameters. The results showed that the
composite face effect for unfamiliar (Experiment 1) and familiar (Experiment 2) faces is generated by pure changes in the
exponential component of the ex-Gaussian distribution. This held true for both partial and complete design measures.
The exponential component has been attributed to working memory and attentional processes. The results suggest the
involvement of attentional and working memory processes in the composite face effect and in the perception of faces
in general. They cast doubts on the holistic nature of face processing. The results also provide important constraints on
future computational theories of the effect.
... For example, Fitousi (2015) deployed the Garner paradigm (Garner, 1974; for review see Algom & Fitousi, 2016)-a classic measure of holistic processing-to test the integrality of top and bottom halves in composite faces. He found no interference between the two components, a result that supported their separability (see also Amishav & Kimchi, 2010;Pomerantz et al., 2003;Richler et al., 2013). ...
Composite faces fuse the top and bottom halves from two different faces to create a powerful illusion of a novel face.
It has been argued that composite faces are processed holistically, namely that the constituent face parts are perceived
as a template, rather than independent features. This study sought to uncover the locus of the composite face effect
by relating its empirical reaction time distributions to theoretical ex-Gaussian parameters. The results showed that the
composite face effect for unfamiliar (Experiment 1) and familiar (Experiment 2) faces is generated by pure changes in the
exponential component of the ex-Gaussian distribution. This held true for both partial and complete design measures.
The exponential component has been attributed to working memory and attentional processes. The results suggest the
involvement of attentional and working memory processes in the composite face effect and in the perception of faces
in general. They cast doubts on the holistic nature of face processing. The results also provide important constraints on
future computational theories of the effect.
... Several concerns about the lack of convergent validity of these tasks have been voiced (DeGutis, Wilmer, Mercado, & Cohan, 2013;Richler, Cheung, & Gauthier, 2011). For instance, closely related research focused in classification has shown that selective attention for upright faces is possible (Amishav & Kimchi, 2010;Fifić & Townsend, 2010;Fitousi, 2015; but see Richler, Palmeri, & Gauthier, 2013). Similar contradictory findings have also been observed in other-race effect studies using both the part-to-whole paradigm (DeGutis, Mercado, Wilmer, & Rosenblatt, 2013;Michel, Rossion, Han, Chung, & Caldara, 2006;Mondloch et al., 2010;Tanaka, Kiefer, & Bukach, 2004) and the composite task (Curby, Johnson, & Tyson, 2012;Harrison, Gauthier, Hayward, & Richler, 2014;Horry, Cheong, & Brewer, 2015). ...
The other-race effect refers to the difficulty of discriminating between faces from ethnic and racial groups other than one's own. This effect may be caused by a slow, feature-by-feature, analytic process, whereas the discrimination of own-race faces occurs faster and more holistically. However, this distinction has received inconsistent support. To provide a critical test, we employed Systems Factorial Technology (Townsend & Nozawa in Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 39, 321-359, 1995), which is a powerful tool for analyzing the organization of mental networks underlying perceptual processes. We compared Taiwanese participants' face discriminations of both own-race (Taiwanese woman) and other-race (Caucasian woman) faces according to the faces' nose-to-mouth separation and eye-to-eye separation. We found evidence for weak holistic processing (parallel processing) coupled with the strong analytic property of a self-terminating stopping rule for own-race faces, in contrast to strong analytic processing (serial self-terminating processing) for other-race faces, supporting the holistic/analytic hypothesis.
... In spite of the fact that holistic processing gives rise to sophisticated face processing, it can sometimes interfere with face processing. This interference is most obvious in face-part information processing, as demonstrated in the classical composite face effect (Young et al., 1987;Richler et al., 2011bRichler et al., , 2013. In the composite face effect, the recognition of a certain face part (e.g., the upper face half) is affected by the presence of another irrelevant face part (e.g., the lower face half). ...
... In spite of the fact that holistic processing gives rise to sophisticated face processing, it can sometimes interfere with face processing. This interference is most obvious in face-part information processing, as demonstrated in the classical composite face effect (Young et al., 1987;Richler et al., 2011bRichler et al., , 2013. In the composite face effect, the recognition of a certain face part (e.g., the upper face half) is affected by the presence of another irrelevant face part (e.g., the lower face half). ...
For the past century, researchers have extensively studied human face processing and its development. These studies have advanced our understanding of not only face processing, but also visual processing in general. However, most of what we know about face processing was investigated using static face images as stimuli. Therefore, an important question arises: to what extent does our understanding of static face processing generalize to face processing in real-life contexts in which faces are mostly moving? The present article addresses this question by examining recent studies on moving face processing to uncover the influence of facial movements on face processing and its development. First, we describe evidence on the facilitative effects of facial movements on face recognition and two related theoretical hypotheses: the supplementary information hypothesis and the representation enhancement hypothesis. We then highlight several recent studies suggesting that facial movements optimize face processing by activating specific face processing strategies that accommodate to task requirements. Lastly, we review the influence of facial movements on the development of face processing in the first year of life. We focus on infants' sensitivity to facial movements and explore the facilitative effects of facial movements on infants' face recognition performance. We conclude by outlining several future directions to investigate moving face processing and emphasize the importance of including dynamic aspects of facial information to further understand face processing in real-life contexts.
Composite faces fuse the top and bottom halves from two different faces to create a powerful illusion of a novel face. It has been argued that composite faces are processed holistically, namely that the constituent face parts are perceived as a template, rather than independent features. This study sought to uncover the locus of the composite face effect by relating its empirical reaction time distributions to theoretical ex-Gaussian parameters. The results showed that the composite face effect for unfamiliar (Experiment 1) and familiar (Experiment 2) faces is generated by pure changes in the exponential component of the ex-Gaussian distribution. This held true for both partial and complete design measures. The exponential component has been attributed to working memory and attentional processes. The results suggest the involvement of attentional and working memory processes in the composite face effect and in the perception of faces in general. They cast doubts on the holistic nature of face processing. The results also provide important constraints on future computational theories of the effect.
Holistic processing is often used as a construct to characterize face recognition. An important recent study by Gold, Mundy, and Tjan (2012) quantified holistic processing by computing a facial-feature integration index derived from an ideal observer model. This index was mathematically defined as the ratio of the psychophysical contrast sensitivities squared for recognizing a whole face versus the sum of contrast sensitivities squared for individual face parts (left eye, right eye, nose, and mouth). They observed that this index was not significantly different from 1, leading to the provocative conclusion that the perception of a face is no more than the sum of its parts. What may not be obvious to all readers of this work is that these conclusions were based on a collection of faces that shared essentially the same configuration of face parts. We tested whether the facial-feature integration index would also equal 1 when faces have a range of configurations mirroring the range of variability in real-world faces, using the same experimental procedure and calculating the same integration index as Gold et al. When tested on faces with the same configuration, we also observed an integration index similar to what Gold et al. reported. But when tested on faces with variable configurations, we observed an integration index significantly greater than 1. Combing our results with those of Gold et al. further clarifies the theoretical construct of holistic processing in face recognition and what it means for the whole to be greater than the sum of its parts.
Face perception is widely believed to involve integration of facial features into a holistic perceptual unit, but the mechanisms underlying this integration are relatively unknown. We examined whether perceptual grouping cues influence a classic marker of holistic face perception, the "composite-face effect." Participants made same-different judgments about a cued part of sequentially presented chimeric faces, and holistic processing was indexed as the degree to which the task-irrelevant face halves impacted performance. Grouping was encouraged or discouraged by adjusting the backgrounds behind the face halves: Although the face halves were always aligned, their respective backgrounds could be misaligned and of different colors. Holistic processing of face, but not of nonface, stimuli was significantly reduced when the backgrounds were misaligned and of different colors, cues that discouraged grouping of the face halves into a cohesive unit (Exp. 1). This effect was sensitive to stimulus orientation at short (200 ms) but not at long (2,500 ms) encoding durations, consistent with the previously documented temporal properties of the holistic processing of upright and inverted faces (Exps. 2 and 3). These results suggest that grouping mechanisms, typically involved in the perception of objecthood more generally, might contribute in important ways to the holistic perception of faces.
Holistic processing was initially characterized a unique hallmark of face perception (e.g., Young et al., 1987) and later argued a domain-general marker of perceptual expertise (e.g., Gauthier et al., 1998). More recently, evidence for holistic processing - measured by interference from task-irrelevant parts - was obtained in novices, raising questions for its usefulness as a test of expertise. Indeed, recent studies use the same task to make opposite claims: Hsiao & Cottrell (2009) found more interference in novices than experts for Chinese characters, while Wong, Palmeri & Gauthier (2009) found more interference in experts than novices with objects. Offering a resolution to this paradox, our work on the perception of musical notation (Wong & Gauthier, in press) suggests that expert and novice interference effects represent two ends of a continuum: interference is initially strategic and contextual, but becomes more automatic as holistic processing develops with the acquisition of perceptual expertise.
One hallmark of holistic face processing is an inability to selectively attend to 1 face part while ignoring information in another part. In 3 sequential matching experiments, the authors tested perceptual and decisional accounts of holistic processing by measuring congruency effects between cued and uncued composite face halves shown in spatially aligned or disjointed configurations. The authors found congruency effects when the top and bottom halves of the study face were spatially aligned, misaligned (Experiment 1), or adjacent to one another (Experiment 2). However, at test, congruency effects were reduced by misalignment and abolished for adjacent configurations. This suggests that manipulations at test are more influential than manipulations at study, consistent with a decisional account of holistic processing. When encoding demands for study and test faces were equated (Experiment 3), the authors observed effects of study configuration suggesting that, consistent with a perceptual explanation, encoding does influence the magnitude of holistic processing. Together, these results cannot be accounted for by current perceptual or decisional accounts of holistic processing and suggest the existence of an attention-dependent mechanism that can integrate spatially separated face parts.
The relative contribution of componential and configural information to face perception is controversial. We addressed this issue in the present study by examining how componential information and configural information interact during face processing, using Garner's (1974) speeded classification paradigm. When classifying upright faces varying in components (eyes, nose, and mouth) and configural information (intereyes and nose-mouth spacing), observers could not selectively attend to components without being influenced by irrelevant variation in configural information, and vice versa, indicating that componential information and configural information are integral in upright face processing. Performance with inverted faces showed selective attention to components but not to configural information, implying dominance of componential information in processing inverted faces. When faces varied only in components, selective attention to different components was observed in upright and inverted faces, indicating that facial components are perceptually separable. These results provide strong evidence that integrality of componential and configural information, rather than the relative dominance of either, is the hallmark of upright face perception.