scholarly journals Differences between and within individuals, and subprocesses of face cognition: implications for theory, research and personnel selection

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 200233
Author(s):  
Matthew C. Fysh ◽  
Lisa Stacchi ◽  
Meike Ramon
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Real World ◽  
Personnel Selection ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Screening Tests ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Performance Profiles ◽  
The Individual

Recent investigations of individual differences have demonstrated striking variability in performance both within the same subprocess in face cognition (e.g. face perception), but also between two different subprocesses (i.e. face perception versus face recognition ) that are assessed using different tasks (face matching versus face memory ). Such differences between and within individuals between and within laboratory tests raise practical challenges. This applies in particular to the development of screening tests for the selection of personnel in real-world settings where faces are routinely processed, such as at passport control. The aim of this study, therefore, was to examine the performance profiles of individuals within and across two different subprocesses of face cognition: face perception and face recognition. To this end, 146 individuals completed four different tests of face matching—one novel tool for assessing proficiency in face perception, as well as three established measures—and two benchmark tests of face memory probing face recognition. In addition to correlational analyses, we further scrutinized individual performance profiles of the highest and lowest performing observers identified per test , as well as across all tests . Overall, a number of correlations emerged between tests. However, there was limited evidence at the individual level to suggest that high proficiency in one test generalized to other tests measuring the same subprocess, as well as those that measured a different subprocess. Beyond emphasizing the need to honour inter-individual differences through careful multivariate assessment in the laboratory, our findings have real-world implications: combinations of tests that most accurately map the task(s) and processes of interest are required for personnel selection.

Individual Differences in Intrinsic Brain Networks Predict Symptom Severity in Autism Spectrum Disorders

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 681-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Peng Kiat Pua ◽  
Phoebe Thomson ◽  
Joseph Yuan-Mou Yang ◽  
Jeffrey M Craig ◽  
Gareth Ball ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Autism Spectrum Disorders ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Symptom Severity ◽  
Brain Networks ◽  
Monozygotic Twins ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Social Impairment ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Spectrum Disorders

Abstract The neurobiology of heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorders such as Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) is still unknown. We hypothesized that differences in subject-level properties of intrinsic brain networks were important features that could predict individual variation in ASD symptom severity. We matched cases and controls from a large multicohort ASD dataset (ABIDE-II) on age, sex, IQ, and image acquisition site. Subjects were matched at the individual level (rather than at group level) to improve homogeneity within matched case–control pairs (ASD: n = 100, mean age = 11.43 years, IQ = 110.58; controls: n = 100, mean age = 11.43 years, IQ = 110.70). Using task-free functional magnetic resonance imaging, we extracted intrinsic functional brain networks using projective non-negative matrix factorization. Intrapair differences in strength in subnetworks related to the salience network (SN) and the occipital-temporal face perception network were robustly associated with individual differences in social impairment severity (T = 2.206, P = 0.0301). Findings were further replicated and validated in an independent validation cohort of monozygotic twins (n = 12; 3 pairs concordant and 3 pairs discordant for ASD). Individual differences in the SN and face-perception network are centrally implicated in the neural mechanisms of social deficits related to ASD.

Case-method teaching: advantages and disadvantages in organizational training

2018 ◽  
Vol 37 (9/10) ◽  
pp. 711-720 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naghi Radi Afsouran ◽  
Morteza Charkhabi ◽  
Seyed Ali Siadat ◽  
Reza Hoveida ◽  
Hamid Reza Oreyzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Real World ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Case Method ◽  
Training Methods ◽  
Organizational Training ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Individual

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce case-method teaching (CMT), its advantages and disadvantages for the process of organizational training within organizations, as well as to compare its advantages and disadvantages with current training methods. Design/methodology/approach The authors applied a systematic literature review to define, identify and compare CMT with current methods. Findings In CMT, participants get involved with real-world challenges from an action perspective instead of analyzing them from a distance. Also, different reactions of the participants to the same challenge aid instructors to identify the individual differences of participants toward the challenge. Although CMT is still not considered as a popular organizational training method, the advantages of CMT may encourage organizational instructors to further apply it. Improving the long-term memory, enhancing the quality of decision making and understanding the individual differences of individuals are the advantages of CMT. Research limitations/implications A lack of sufficient empirical researchers and the high cost of conducting this method may prevent practitioners to apply it. Originality/value The review suggested that CMT is able to bring dilemmas from the real world into training settings. Also, it helps organizations to identify the individual reactions before they make a decision.

scholarly journals Orientation-invariance of individual differences in three face processing tasks

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 181350
Author(s):  
G. Meinhardt ◽  
B. Meinhardt-Injac ◽  
M. Persike
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Selective Attention ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Face Processing ◽  
Common Factor ◽  
Principal Component ◽  
Common Variance ◽  
Strong Inversion ◽  
Orientation Invariance

Numerous studies have reported impairments in perception and recognition, and, particularly, in part-integration of faces following picture-plane inversion. Whether these findings support the notion that inversion changes face processing qualitatively remains a topic of debate. To examine whether associations and dissociations of the human face processing ability depend on stimulus orientation, we measured face recognition with the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT), along with experimental tests of face perception and selective attention to faces and non-face objects in a sample of 314 participants. Results showed strong inversion effects for all face-related tasks, and modest ones for non-face objects. Individual differences analysis revealed that the CFMT shared common variance with face perception and face-selective attention, however, independent of orientation. Regardless of whether predictor and criterion had same or different orientation, face recognition was best predicted by the same test battery. Principal component decomposition revealed a common factor for face recognition and face perception, a second common factor for face recognition and face-selective attention, and two unique factors. The patterns of factor loadings were nearly identical for upright and inverted presentation. These results indicate orientation-invariance of common variance in three domains of face processing. Since inversion impaired performance, but did not affect domain-related associations and dissociations, the findings suggest process-specific but orientation-general mechanisms. Specific limitations by constraints of individual differences analysis and test selection are discussed.

scholarly journals Analysis of co-authorship patterns at the individual level

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Glänzel
Keyword(s):  
Research Collaboration ◽  
Citation Impact ◽  
Career Mobility ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Utmost Care ◽  
Performance Profiles ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Individual ◽  
New Applications

Publication activity, citation impact and communication patterns, in general, change in the course of a scientist's career. Mobility and radical changes in a scientist's research environment or profile are among the most spectacular factors that have effect on individual collaboration patterns. Although bibliometrics at this level should be applied with the utmost care, characteristic patterns of an individual scientist's research collaboration and changes in these in the course of a career can be well depicted using bibliometric methods. A wide variety of indicators and network tools are chosen to follow up the evolution and to visualise and to quantify collaboration and performance profiles of individual researchers. These methods are, however, designed to supplement expert-opinion based assessment and other qualitative assessments, and should not be used as stand-alone evaluation tools. This study presents part of the results published in an earlier study by Zhang and Glänzel (2012)4 as well as new applications of these methods.

Justice in Teams

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincente Martínez-Tur ◽  
Carolina Moliner
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Single Group ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Successful Model ◽  
Shared Experiences ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Justice Climate

Traditionally, justice in teams refers to a specific climate—called justice climate—describing shared perceptions about how the team as a whole is treated. Justice at the individual level has been a successful model from which to build the concept of justice in teams. Accordingly, there is a parallelism between the individual and team levels in the investigation of justice, where scholars’ concerns and responses have been very similar, despite studying different levels of construct. However, the specific particularities of teams are increasingly considered in research. There are three concepts (faultlines, subgrouping, and intergroup justice) that contribute to knowledge by focusing on particularities of teams that are not present at the individual level. The shift toward team-based structures provides an opportunity to observe the existence of dividing lines that may split a team into subgroups (faultlines) and the difficulty, in many cases, of conceiving of the team members as part of a single group. This perspective about teams also stimulates the study of the subgroup as a source of justice and the focus on intergroup justice within the team. In sum, the organizational context facilitates shared experiences and perceptions of justice beyond individual differences but also can result in potential conflicts and discrepancies among subgroups within the team in their interpretation of fairness.

Self-organizing behavior in collective choice models: laboratory experiments

2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santiago Arango ◽  
Erik R. Larsen ◽  
Ann van Ackere
Keyword(s):  
System Performance ◽  
Information Diffusion ◽  
Laboratory Experiments ◽  
Empirical Work ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Queuing Systems ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Individual

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to consider queuing systems where captive repeat customers select a service facility each period. Are people in such a distributed system, with limited information diffusion, able to approach optimal system performance? How are queues formed? How do people decide which queue to join based on past experience? The authors explore these questions, investigating the effect of information availability, as well as the effect of heterogeneous facility sizes, at the macro (system) and micro (individual performance) levels. Design/methodology/approach – Experimental economics, using a queuing experiment. Findings – The authors find little behavioural difference at the aggregate level, but observe significant variations at the individual level. This leads the authors to the conclusion that it is not sufficient to evaluate system performance by observing average customer allocation and sojourn times at the different facilities; one also needs to consider the individuals’ performance to understand how well the chosen design works. The authors also observe that better information diffusion does not necessarily improve system performance. Practical/implications – Evaluating system performance based on aggregate behaviour can be misleading; however, this is how many systems are evaluated in practice, when only aggregate performance measures are available. This can lead to suboptimal system designs. Originality/value – There has been little theoretical or empirical work on queuing systems with captive repeat customers. This study contributes to the understanding of decision making in such systems, using laboratory experiments based on the cellular automata approach, but with all agents replaced by humans.

Allostasis and metastasis: The yin and yang of childhood self-regulation

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Samuel V. Wass
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Stressful Events ◽  
The Real ◽  
Chain Reactions ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Yin And Yang ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Regulation Of Emotion ◽  
Dynamical Principle

Abstract Most research has studied self-regulation by presenting experimenter-controlled test stimuli and measuring change between baseline and stimulus. In the real world, however, stressors do not flash on and off in a predetermined sequence, and there is no experimenter controlling things. Rather, the real world is continuous and stressful events can occur through self-sustaining interactive chain reactions. Self-regulation is an active process through which we adaptively select which aspects of the social environment we attend to from one moment to the next. Here, we describe this dynamic interactive process by contrasting two mechanisms that underpin it: the “yin” and “yang” of self-regulation. The first mechanism is allostasis, the dynamical principle underlying self-regulation, through which we compensate for change to maintain homeostasis. This involves upregulating in some situations and downregulating in others. The second mechanism is metastasis, the dynamical principle underling dysregulation. Through metastasis, small initial perturbations can become progressively amplified over time. We contrast these processes at the individual level (i.e., examining moment-to-moment change in one child, considered independently) and also at the inter-personal level (i.e., examining change across a dyad, such as a parent–child dyad). Finally, we discuss practical implications of this approach in improving the self-regulation of emotion and cognition, in typical development and psychopathology.

scholarly journals Working Together versus Working Autonomously: a New Power-Dependence Perspective on the Individual-Level of Analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon B. de Jong
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
Individual Performance ◽  
Task Interdependence ◽  
Theoretical Development ◽  
Power Dependence ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Task Autonomy ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Level Of Analysis ◽  
And Task

AbstractRecent studies have indicated that it is important to investigate the interaction between task interdependence and task autonomy because this interaction can affect team effectiveness. However, only a limited number of studies have been conducted and those studies focused solely on the team level of analysis. Moreover, there has also been a dearth of theoretical development. Therefore, this study develops and tests an alternative theoretical perspective in an attempt to understand if, and if so why, this interaction is important at the individual level of analysis. Based on interdependence theory and power-dependence theory, we expected that highly task-interdependent individuals who reported high task autonomy would be more powerful and better performers. In contrast, we expected that similarly high task-interdependent individuals who reported less task autonomy would be less powerful and would be weaker performers. These expectations were supported by multi-level and bootstrapping analyses performed on a multi-source dataset (self-, peer-, manager-ratings) comprised of 182 employees drawn from 37 teams. More specifically, the interaction between task interdependence and task autonomy was γ =.128, p <.05 for power and γ =.166, p <.05 for individual performance. The 95% bootstrap interval ranged from .0038 to .0686.

scholarly journals Is the true ‘wisdom of the crowd’ to copy successful individuals?

2011 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew J. King ◽  
Lawrence Cheng ◽  
Sandra D. Starke ◽  
Julia P. Myatt
Keyword(s):  
Social Influence ◽  
Small Group ◽  
Swarm Intelligence ◽  
Real World ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Group Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
True Value ◽  
Individual Decisions ◽  
The Individual

Diversity of expertise at an individual level can increase intelligence at a collective level—a type of swarm intelligence (SI) popularly known as the ‘wisdom of the crowd’. However, this requires independent estimates (rare in the real world owing to the availability of public information) and contradicts people's bias for copying successful individuals. To explain these inconsistencies, 429 people took part in a ‘guess the number of sweets’ exercise. Guesses made with no public information were diverse, resulting in highly accurate SI. Individuals with access to the previous guess, mean guess or a randomly chosen guess, tended to over-estimate the number of sweets and this undermined SI. However, when people were provided with the current best guess, this prevented very large (inaccurate) guesses, resulting in convergence of guesses towards the true value and accurate SI across a range of group sizes. Thus, contrary to previous work, we show that social influence need not undermine SI, especially where individual decisions are made sequentially and then aggregated. Furthermore, we offer an explanation for why people have a bias to recruit and follow experts in team settings: copying successful individuals can enable accuracy at both the individual and group level, even at small group sizes.

scholarly journals Do you see the “face”? Individual differences in face pareidolia

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liu-Fang Zhou ◽  
Ming Meng
Keyword(s):  
Sex Differences ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Personality Traits ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Clinical Applications ◽  
Neural Mechanisms ◽  
Developmental Factors ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Brain

Abstract People tend to see faces from non-face objects or meaningless patterns. Such illusory face perception is called face pareidolia. Previous studies have revealed an interesting fact that there are huge individual differences in face pareidolia experience among the population. Here, we review previous findings on individual differences in face pareidolia experience from four categories: sex differences, developmental factors, personality traits and neurodevelopmental factors. We further discuss underlying cognitive or neural mechanisms to explain why some perceive the objects as faces while others do not. The individual differences in face pareidolia could not only offer scientific insights on how the brain works to process face information, but also suggest potential clinical applications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document