The ventral stream receives spatial information from the dorsal stream during configural face processing

Configural face processing is considered to be vital for face perception. If configural face processing requires an evaluation of spatial information, might this process involve interactions between ventral stream face-processing regions and dorsal stream visuospatial-processing regions? We explored this possibility using thetaburst stimulation (TBS) with fMRI in humans. Participants were shown two faces that differed in either the shape (featural differences) or the spatial configuration (configural differences) of their features. TBS applied on dorsal location-processing regions: 1) reduced fMRI activity within ventral stream face-processing regions during configural but not featural face processing; and 2) reduced functional connectivity between these face regions significantly more for configural than featural face processing. No changes occurred when TBS was delivered on the vertex control site for either face task. We conclude that ventral stream face-processing regions receive visuospatial information from dorsal stream location-processing regions during configural face processing.Significance statementFace perception is thought to be mediated exclusively by neural substrates within the ventral visual pathway. However, by using non-invasive brain stimulation (thetabust transcranial magnetic stimulation) in healthy human adults, we demonstrate that the face-processing regions of the ventral visual pathway receive information from visuospatial-processing regions of the dorsal visual pathway during configural face processing, a vital function in face perception. Our findings thus indicate that veridical face perception may depend on both the ventral and dorsal visual pathways.

Configural and Featural Face Processing Influences on Emotion Recognition in Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder

Objectives: Emotion recognition impairments have been demonstrated in schizophrenia (Sz), but are less consistent and lesser in magnitude in bipolar disorder (BD). This may be related to the extent to which different face processing strategies are engaged during emotion recognition in each of these disorders. We recently showed that Sz patients had impairments in the use of both featural and configural face processing strategies, whereas BD patients were impaired only in the use of the latter. Here we examine the influence that these impairments have on facial emotion recognition in these cohorts. Methods: Twenty-eight individuals with Sz, 28 individuals with BD, and 28 healthy controls completed a facial emotion labeling task with two conditions designed to separate the use of featural and configural face processing strategies; part-based and whole-face emotion recognition. Results: Sz patients performed worse than controls on both conditions, and worse than BD patients on the whole-face condition. BD patients performed worse than controls on the whole-face condition only. Conclusions: Configural processing deficits appear to influence the recognition of facial emotions in BD, whereas both configural and featural processing abnormalities impair emotion recognition in Sz. This may explain discrepancies in the profiles of emotion recognition between the disorders. (JINS, 2017, 23, 287–291)

Configural Face Processing Develops more Slowly than Featural Face Processing

Expertise in face processing takes many years to develop. To determine the contribution of different face-processing skills to this slow development, we altered a single face so as to create sets of faces designed to measure featural, configural, and contour processing. Within each set, faces differed only in the shape of the eyes and mouth (featural set), only in the spacing of the eyes and mouth (spacing set), or only in the shape of the external contour (contour set). We presented adults, and children aged 6, 8, and 10 years, with pairs of upright and inverted faces and instructed them to indicate whether the two faces were the same or different. Adults showed a larger inversion effect for the spacing set than for the featural and external contour sets, confirming that the spacing set taps configural processing. On the spacing set, all groups of children made more errors than adults. In contrast, on the external contour and featural sets, children at all ages were almost as accurate as adults, with no significant difference beginning at age 6 on the external contour set and beginning at age 10 on the featural set. Overall, the results indicate that adult expertise in configural processing is especially slow to develop.