Facilitation and interference are asymmetric in holistic face processing.

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-04 DOI:10.3758/s13423-024-02481-9
Haiyang Jin, Luyan Ji, Olivia S Cheung, William G Hayward
{"title":"Facilitation and interference are asymmetric in holistic face processing.","authors":"Haiyang Jin, Luyan Ji, Olivia S Cheung, William G Hayward","doi":"10.3758/s13423-024-02481-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A hallmark of face specificity is holistic processing. It is typically measured by paradigms such as the part-whole and composite tasks. However, these tasks show little evidence for common variance, so a comprehensive account of holistic processing remains elusive. One aspect that varies between tasks is whether they measure facilitation or interference from holistic processing. In this study, we examined facilitation and interference in a single paradigm to determine the way in which they manifest during a face perception task. Using congruent and incongruent trials in the complete composite face task, we found that these two aspects are asymmetrically influenced by the location and cueing probabilities of the target facial half, suggesting that they may operate somewhat independently. We argue that distinguishing facilitation and interference has the potential to disentangle mixed findings from different popular paradigms measuring holistic processing in one unified framework.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":"2214-2225"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11543743/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02481-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A hallmark of face specificity is holistic processing. It is typically measured by paradigms such as the part-whole and composite tasks. However, these tasks show little evidence for common variance, so a comprehensive account of holistic processing remains elusive. One aspect that varies between tasks is whether they measure facilitation or interference from holistic processing. In this study, we examined facilitation and interference in a single paradigm to determine the way in which they manifest during a face perception task. Using congruent and incongruent trials in the complete composite face task, we found that these two aspects are asymmetrically influenced by the location and cueing probabilities of the target facial half, suggesting that they may operate somewhat independently. We argue that distinguishing facilitation and interference has the potential to disentangle mixed findings from different popular paradigms measuring holistic processing in one unified framework.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在整体人脸处理过程中,促进和干扰是不对称的。
人脸特异性的一个标志是整体处理。它通常是通过部分-整体和综合任务等范式来测量的。然而,这些任务几乎没有显示出共同的变异,因此对整体加工的全面解释仍然难以实现。不同任务之间存在差异的一个方面是,它们测量的是整体加工的促进作用还是干扰作用。在本研究中,我们在单一范式中考察了促进和干扰,以确定它们在人脸感知任务中的表现方式。在完整的综合人脸任务中,我们使用了一致和不一致的试验,发现这两个方面受目标面部一半的位置和提示概率的影响是不对称的,这表明它们可能在某种程度上是独立运行的。我们认为,区分促进和干扰有可能在一个统一的框架内将测量整体加工的不同流行范式的混合研究结果区分开来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
期刊最新文献
Product, not process: Metacognitive monitoring of visual performance during sustained attention. Cracking arbitrariness: A data-driven study of auditory iconicity in spoken English. Parameter identifiability in evidence-accumulation models: The effect of error rates on the diffusion decision model and the linear ballistic accumulator. Visual attention matters during word recognition: A Bayesian modeling approach. Generating distant analogies increases metaphor production.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1