Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Inversion leads to quantitative, not qualitative, changes in face processing.

Allison B Sekuler1, Carl M Gaspar, Jason M Gold

  • 1Department of Psychology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K1, Canada. sekuler@mcmaster.ca

Current Biology : CB
|March 19, 2004
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Post COVID-19 condition is associated with altered regional cerebral blood volume as revealed by dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI.

Frontiers in neuroimaging·2026
Same author

The effects of aging on directionally selective masking.

Journal of vision·2025
Same author

Spontaneous blinking and brain health in aging: Large-scale evaluation of blink-related oscillations across the lifespan.

Frontiers in aging neuroscience·2025
Same author

Scanning efficacy of p-Chips implanted in the wing and leg of the Big Brown Bat (<i>Eptesicus fuscus</i>).

Journal of mammalogy·2024
Same author

An edge-simplicity bias in the visual input to young infants.

Science advances·2024
Same author

The time course of stimulus-specific perceptual learning.

Journal of vision·2024
Same journal

Hunting ecology predicts eye arrangements in the modular visual system of spiders.

Current biology : CB·2026
Same journal

Sub-second fluctuations between top-down and bottom-up modes distinguish diverse human brain states.

Current biology : CB·2026
Same journal

Queen bees offload pesticide burden to eggs when social buffering is overwhelmed.

Current biology : CB·2026
Same journal

Pitch selectivity in ferret auditory cortex.

Current biology : CB·2026
Same journal

A cell size-dependent competition between geometry and polarity governs nuclear and spindle positioning in early embryos.

Current biology : CB·2026
Same journal

Trophic cascades drive sustainability in the agricultural heritage rice-fish coculture system.

Current biology : CB·2026
See all related articles

Face recognition is impaired when faces are inverted. This study found that upright and inverted face processing differ quantitatively, not qualitatively, suggesting more efficient information extraction from upright faces due to expertise.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Human Perception

Background:

  • Humans excel at object recognition across various views.
  • Face recognition is an exception, significantly impaired by inversion.
  • The face inversion effect is often considered evidence of qualitative processing differences.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the perceptual strategies underlying face discrimination.
  • To determine if orientation effects in face processing stem from differential nonlinear mechanisms.
  • To test whether face inversion represents a qualitative or quantitative shift in processing.

Main Methods:

  • Employed response classification to directly observe perceptual strategies.
  • Utilized a face discrimination task to measure performance.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analyzed the contributions of nonlinear mechanisms across upright and inverted face conditions.

    • Main Results:

    • Face inversion significantly impaired discrimination performance.
    • Observers used similar local facial regions for discrimination in both upright and inverted conditions.
    • The contribution of nonlinear mechanisms to performance was comparable across orientations.

    Conclusions:

    • Upright and inverted face processing differ quantitatively, not qualitatively.
    • Information is extracted more efficiently from upright faces.
    • This quantitative difference may arise from orientation-dependent expertise.