Janice Attard-Johnson, Olivia Dark, Ebony Murray, Sarah Bate
{"title":"发育性前睑闭锁症患者和 \"超级识别者 \"的不同年龄感知。","authors":"Janice Attard-Johnson, Olivia Dark, Ebony Murray, Sarah Bate","doi":"10.1186/s41235-024-00603-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The interplay between facial age and facial identity is evident from several scenarios experienced in daily life, such as when recognising a face several decades after the last exposure. However, the link between age and identity processing, and how age perception abilities might diverge in individuals with different face processing abilities, has scarcely been considered. Furthermore, the approach used to test age perception ability may also influence outcome, but the effect of different paradigms on performance is not yet known. Across three studies, we compare super-recognisers (SRs), people with developmental prosopagnosia (DPs), and a group of neurotypical controls, on three age perception paradigms. There were no differences on the numeric age estimation task (i.e. providing precise age estimates for a series of faces; Study 1), and numeric age estimation task with added noise-distortion to stimuli (Study 2). However, SRs were more accurate when instructed to classify ambient faces as either over- or under- the age of 18 compared to both DPs and controls (Study 3). Thus, there may be nuanced differences in age processing which can be tapped into using separate paradigms; however, given that the difference is only with SRs it remains unclear to what extent these are linked to facial identity processing.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"9 1","pages":"76"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11557776/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Different facets of age perception in people with developmental prosopagnosia and \\\"super-recognisers\\\".\",\"authors\":\"Janice Attard-Johnson, Olivia Dark, Ebony Murray, Sarah Bate\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41235-024-00603-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The interplay between facial age and facial identity is evident from several scenarios experienced in daily life, such as when recognising a face several decades after the last exposure. However, the link between age and identity processing, and how age perception abilities might diverge in individuals with different face processing abilities, has scarcely been considered. Furthermore, the approach used to test age perception ability may also influence outcome, but the effect of different paradigms on performance is not yet known. Across three studies, we compare super-recognisers (SRs), people with developmental prosopagnosia (DPs), and a group of neurotypical controls, on three age perception paradigms. There were no differences on the numeric age estimation task (i.e. providing precise age estimates for a series of faces; Study 1), and numeric age estimation task with added noise-distortion to stimuli (Study 2). However, SRs were more accurate when instructed to classify ambient faces as either over- or under- the age of 18 compared to both DPs and controls (Study 3). Thus, there may be nuanced differences in age processing which can be tapped into using separate paradigms; however, given that the difference is only with SRs it remains unclear to what extent these are linked to facial identity processing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46827,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"76\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11557776/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-024-00603-4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-024-00603-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
脸部年龄与脸部身份之间的相互作用在日常生活中的一些场景中显而易见,例如在最后一次接触一张脸的几十年后再去识别它。然而,关于年龄与身份处理之间的联系,以及年龄感知能力如何在具有不同面部处理能力的个体中产生差异,却很少有人考虑过。此外,用于测试年龄感知能力的方法也可能影响结果,但不同范式对结果的影响尚不清楚。在三项研究中,我们比较了超级识别者(SRs)、发展性面容失认症患者(DPs)和一组神经典型对照组在三种年龄感知范式上的表现。在数字年龄估计任务(即为一系列面孔提供精确的年龄估计;研究 1)和在刺激物中添加噪音失真的数字年龄估计任务(研究 2)上没有差异。然而,与民主党人和对照组相比,当被要求将环境中的面孔划分为超过或低于18岁时,SR的准确性更高(研究3)。因此,在年龄处理方面可能存在细微差别,可以使用不同的范式来挖掘这种差异;但是,鉴于这种差异仅出现在 SR 身上,因此仍不清楚这些差异在多大程度上与面部身份处理有关。
Different facets of age perception in people with developmental prosopagnosia and "super-recognisers".
The interplay between facial age and facial identity is evident from several scenarios experienced in daily life, such as when recognising a face several decades after the last exposure. However, the link between age and identity processing, and how age perception abilities might diverge in individuals with different face processing abilities, has scarcely been considered. Furthermore, the approach used to test age perception ability may also influence outcome, but the effect of different paradigms on performance is not yet known. Across three studies, we compare super-recognisers (SRs), people with developmental prosopagnosia (DPs), and a group of neurotypical controls, on three age perception paradigms. There were no differences on the numeric age estimation task (i.e. providing precise age estimates for a series of faces; Study 1), and numeric age estimation task with added noise-distortion to stimuli (Study 2). However, SRs were more accurate when instructed to classify ambient faces as either over- or under- the age of 18 compared to both DPs and controls (Study 3). Thus, there may be nuanced differences in age processing which can be tapped into using separate paradigms; however, given that the difference is only with SRs it remains unclear to what extent these are linked to facial identity processing.