Comparing the sensitivity of face matching assessments to detect face perception deficits

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maruti Mishra ◽  
Regan Fry ◽  
Elyana Saad ◽  
Joseph Arizpe ◽  
Yuri-Grace Ohashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Control Group ◽  
University Of Southern California ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
Information Research

Numerous neurological, developmental, and psychiatric conditions demonstrate impaired face recognition abilities, which can be socially debilitating. These impairments could be caused by either deficient face perceptual processes, such as reduced ability to integrate face parts into a whole, or deficient face memory processes, such as reduced ability to associate a face with semantic information. Research and clinical practice have focused more on developing face memory assessments, while it currently remains unclear which face perception assessments best captures perceptual deficits. A validated face perception measure could not only help with diagnosing the causes of face recognition deficits but could also help determine the most appropriate treatment. Here, we compare several available face perception assessments to identify those that can best assess perception deficits in developmental prosopagnosics. Thirty prosopagnosics and thirty age-matched neurotypical controls completed a battery of four face perception assessments, namely, computerized Benton Face Recognition Test, Cambridge Face Perception Test, University of Southern California Face Perception Test, and Telling Faces Together Test. They were also evaluated on two face recognition/ memory measures- Cambridge face memory test and famous faces memory test. We used logistic regression for the perception tests to predict prosopagnosic vs. control group membership and used multiple linear regressions to predict continuous objective and subjective measures of face recognition memory. Our results show that the Benton face test was the most reliable (α = 0.74), sensitive (AUC= 0.83), and predictive assessment of prosopagnosia diagnosis and face memory performance across the groups. The Cambridge face perception test also performed adequately well in terms of test sensitivity (AUC=0.80) and predicted face memory performance across the groups. Further, we found that face lighting change trials better predicted DP group membership and face recognition abilities than viewpoint-change trials. Together, these results have direct clinical application in assessing populations with face processing difficulties.

scholarly journals Face Memory and Face Perception in Autism

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirta Stantic ◽  
Eri Ichijo ◽  
Caroline Catmur ◽  
Geoff Bird
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Everyday Life ◽  
Small Group ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Standard Test ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Adults With Autism ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Autistic Adults

AbstractIt has been argued that autistic individuals have difficulties with face memory but typical face perception. However, only one previous study has examined both face memory and face perception in the same individuals, and this study was conducted with a small group of autistic children. Here face recognition was examined with a group of autistic adults using two face perception tasks (including one designed to avoid a neurotypical bias), and a standard test of face memory. Self-reported face recognition difficulties in everyday life were also recorded. The group of adults with autism scored lower than a matched neurotypical control group on all face tasks, and reported more problems with face recognition in everyday life. On the whole results suggest difficulties with both face perception and face memory in autistic adults, although it should be noted that a wide range of scores were recorded from the autistic individuals, with some scoring in the neurotypical range.

scholarly journals Face memory and face perception in autism

Autism ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 136236132110276
Author(s):  
Mirta Stantić ◽  
Eri Ichijo ◽  
Caroline Catmur ◽  
Geoffrey Bird
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Everyday Life ◽  
Small Group ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Standard Test ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Adults With Autism ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Autistic Adults

It has been argued that autistic individuals have difficulties with face memory but typical face perception. However, only one previous study has examined both face memory and face perception in the same individuals, and this study was conducted with a small group of autistic children. Here, face recognition was examined with a group of autistic adults using two face perception tasks (including one designed to avoid a neurotypical bias) and a standard test of face memory. Self-reported face recognition difficulties in everyday life were also recorded. The group of adults with autism scored lower than a matched neurotypical control group on all face tasks and reported more problems with face recognition in everyday life. On the whole, results suggest difficulties with both face perception and face memory in autistic adults, although it should be noted that a wide range of scores were recorded from the autistic individuals, with some scoring in the neurotypical range. Lay abstract It is well known that some people with autism have difficulties recognizing faces. It is generally thought that this is not because autistic individuals cannot perceive faces, but because autistic individuals have greater problems than people without autism in remembering faces. Here, we worked with a group of autistic adults and a group of non-autistic adults to test their ability to perceive and remember faces. We also asked each person to report any difficulties that they have with recognizing faces in everyday life. We find that, as a group, people with autism have difficulties with both remembering and perceiving faces, and report more problems recognizing faces in everyday life. However, it is worth noting that we observed a wide range of scores in the group of people with autism, with some autistic participants scoring as well as the group of people without autism.

scholarly journals Face Perception Deficits in Developmental Prosopagnosia

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Ella Macaskill
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Test Performance ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Memory Deficits ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
The Face ◽  
Component Processes ◽  
Severe Difficulty ◽  
Scale Experiment

<p>Face recognition is a fundamental cognitive function that is essential for social interaction – yet not everyone has it. Developmental prosopagnosia is a lifelong condition in which people have severe difficulty recognising faces but have normal intellect and no brain damage. Despite much research, the component processes of face recognition that are impaired in developmental prosopagnosia are not well understood. Two core processes are face perception, being the formation of visual representations of a currently seen face, and face memory, being the storage, maintenance, and retrieval of those representations. Most studies of developmental prosopagnosia focus on face memory deficits, but a few recent studies indicate that face perception deficits might also be important. Characterising face perception in developmental prosopagnosia is crucial for a better understanding of the condition. In this thesis, I addressed this issue in a large-scale experiment with 108 developmental prosopagnosics and 136 matched controls. I assessed face perception abilities with multiple measures and ran a broad range of analyses to establish the severity, scope, and nature of face perception deficits in developmental prosopagnosia. Three major results stand out. First, face perception deficits in developmental prosopagnosia were severe, and could be comparable in size to face memory deficits. Second, the face perception deficits were widespread, affecting the whole sample rather than a subset of individuals. Third, the deficits were mainly driven by impairments to mechanisms specialised for processing upright faces. Further analyses revealed several other features of the deficits, including the use of atypical and inconsistent strategies for perceiving faces, difficulties matching the same face across different pictures, equivalent impact of lighting and viewpoint variations in face images, and atypical perceptual and non-perceptual components of test performance. Overall, my thesis shows that face perception deficits are more central to developmental prosopagnosia than previously thought and motivates further research on the issue.</p>

scholarly journals Objective Patterns of Face Recognition Deficits in 165 Adults with Self-Reported Developmental Prosopagnosia

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Bate ◽  
Rachel J. Bennetts ◽  
Nicola Gregory ◽  
Jeremy J. Tree ◽  
Ebony Murray ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Severe Form ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
Familiar Face ◽  
Unfamiliar Face ◽  
Prevalent Form

In the last 15 years, increasing numbers of individuals have self-referred to research laboratories in the belief that they experience severe everyday difficulties with face recognition. The condition “developmental prosopagnosia” (DP) is typically diagnosed when impairment is identified on at least two objective face-processing tests, usually involving assessments of face perception, unfamiliar face memory, and famous face recognition. While existing evidence suggests that some individuals may have a mnemonic form of prosopagnosia, it is also possible that other subtypes exist. The current study assessed 165 adults who believe they experience DP, and 38% of the sample were impaired on at least two of the tests outlined above. While statistical dissociations between face perception and face memory were only observed in four cases, a further 25% of the sample displayed dissociations between impaired famous face recognition and intact short-term unfamiliar face memory and face perception. We discuss whether this pattern of findings reflects (a) limitations within dominant diagnostic tests and protocols, (b) a less severe form of DP, or (c) a currently unrecognized but prevalent form of the condition that affects long-term face memory, familiar face recognition or semantic processing.

Not so fast! Response times may not reflect face recognition ability

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xian Li ◽  
Maruti Mishra ◽  
Bar Yosef ◽  
Joseph DeGutis
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Object Recognition ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Response Times ◽  
Fast Response ◽  
Efficiency Score ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Object Processing ◽  
Recognition Ability

Response times (RT) are commonly used to assess cognitive abilities and have recently been employed to assess face and object recognition abilities, such as quantifying the prevalence of object recognition deficits in developmental prosopagnosia (DP). However, it is unclear whether RTs from face and object processing tasks predict recognition ability beyond accuracy. To test the validity of RTs, we examined accuracy and RT on a widely-used face matching assessment modified to collect meaningful RT data, the computerized Benton Face Recognition Test (BFRT-c), and measured whether accuracy and RT predicted face recognition ability and DP/control group membership. 62 controls and 36 developmental prosopagnosics (DPs) performed the BFRT-c as well as validated measures of face recognition ability, the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) and Famous Faces Test (FFT). In both controls and DPs, there was little-to-no association between BFRT-c accuracy and RT (controls: r=.07, DPs: r=.03). In controls, BFRT-c accuracy robustly predicted CFMT (r=.49), FFMT (r=.43), and a composite of these measures (r=.54), whereas BFRT-c RT was not significantly associated with these measures (all r's &lt; .16). We also found that BFRT-c accuracy significantly differed between DPs and controls, but RT failed to differentiate the groups. These results were replicated when performing outlier removal and we also found that combined scores of accuracy and RT (inverse efficiency score and balanced integration score) did not predict face recognition ability or group membership as well as accuracy alone. Together, these results suggest that researchers should use caution when using RTs to characterize individual differences in face processing or diagnose deficits in prosopagnosia.

Adults’ Markers of Face Processing Are Present at Age 6 and Are Interconnected Along Development

Perception ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (10-11) ◽  
pp. 1002-1028 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elite Mardo ◽  
Galia Avidan ◽  
Bat-Sheva Hadad
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Face Perception ◽  
Face Processing ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Specific Marker ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
Perceptual Skills ◽  
Domain Specific

Recent studies on the development of face processing argue for a late, quantitative, domain-specific development of face processing, and face memory in particular. Most previous findings were based on separately tracking the developmental course of face perception skills, comparing performance across different age groups. Here, we adopted a different approach studying the mechanisms underlying the development of face processing by focusing on how different face skills are interrelated over the years (age 6 to adulthood). Specifically, we examined correlations within and between different categories of tasks: face domain-specific skills involving face recognition based on long-term representations (famous face), and short-term memory retention (Cambridge Face Memory Test), perceptual face-specific marker (inversion effect), global effects in scene perception (global–local task), and the perception of facial expressions. Factor analysis revealed that face identity skills have a similar pattern of interrelations throughout development, identifying two factors: a face domain-specific factor comprising adultlike markers of face processing and a general factor incorporating related, but nonspecific perceptual skills. Domain-specific age-related changes in face recognition entailing short- and long-term retention of face representations were observed, along with mature perceptual face-specific markers and more general perceptual effects predicting face perception skills already at age 6. The results suggest that the domain-specific changes in face processing are unlikely to result from developmental changes in perceptual skills driving face recognition. Instead, development may either involve improvement in the ability to retain face representations in memory or changes in the interactions between the perceptual representations of faces and their representations in long-term memory.

Effects of Photo-Depicted Pupil Diameter on Judgments of Others’ Attentiveness and on Facial Recognition Memory

2016 ◽  
Vol 124 (2) ◽  
pp. 366-379
Author(s):  
Nicholas Watier ◽  
Christopher Healy ◽  
Heather Armstrong
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Personnel Selection ◽  
Pupil Size ◽  
Pupil Diameter ◽  
Facial Recognition ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Recognition Memory Performance ◽  
Preliminary Study

Occasionally, individuals perceive that someone is no longer paying attention to the discussion at hand even when there are no overt cues of inattentiveness. As a preliminary study of this phenomenon, we examined whether pupil diameter might be implicitly used to infer others’ attentiveness. Forty participants (27 women, 13 men, M age = 19.7 year, SD = 2.8) were presented with images of male faces with either large or small pupils, and, in the context of a personnel selection scenario, participants then judged the attentiveness of the person in the image. Images of faces with large pupils were judged as more attentive, compared with images of faces with small pupils. Face recognition memory performance was not affected by depicted pupil size. Our results are consistent with the proposal that pupillary fluctuations can be an index of perceived attention, and they provide preliminary evidence that pupil dilation may be implicitly relied upon to infer attentional states.

scholarly journals Robust associations between the 20-item prosopagnosia index and the Cambridge Face Memory Test in the general population

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 160923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie L. H. Gray ◽  
Geoffrey Bird ◽  
Richard Cook
Keyword(s):  
Face Recognition ◽  
General Population ◽  
Validation Study ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Face Memory ◽  
Formal Testing ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Report Measure

Developmental prosopagnosia (DP) is a neurodevelopmental condition, characterized by lifelong face recognition deficits. Leading research groups diagnose the condition using complementary computer-based tasks and self-report measures. In an attempt to standardize the reporting of self-report evidence, we recently developed the 20-item prosopagnosia index (PI20), a short questionnaire measure of prosopagnosic traits suitable for screening adult samples for DP. Strong correlations between scores on the PI20 and performance on the Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) appeared to confirm that individuals possess sufficient insight into their face recognition ability to complete a self-report measure of prosopagnosic traits. However, the extent to which people have insight into their face recognition abilities remains contentious. A lingering concern is that feedback from formal testing, received prior to administration of the PI20, may have augmented the self-insight of some respondents in the original validation study. To determine whether the significant correlation with the CFMT was an artefact of previously delivered feedback, we sought to replicate the validation study in individuals with no history of formal testing. We report highly significant correlations in two independent samples drawn from the general population, confirming: (i) that a significant relationship exists between PI20 scores and performance on the CFMT, and (ii) that this is not dependent on the inclusion of individuals who have previously received feedback. These findings support the view that people have sufficient insight into their face recognition abilities to complete a self-report measure of prosopagnosic traits.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document