Perceptual and decisional factors influencing the discrimination of inversion in the Thatcher illusion.

The Thatcher illusion (Thompson, 1980) is considered to be a prototypical illustration of the notion that face perception is dependent on configural processes and representations. We explored this idea by examining the relative contributions of perceptual and decisional processes to the ability of observers to identify the orientation of two classes of forms-faces and churches-and a set of their component features. Observers were presented with upright and inverted images of faces and churches in which the components (eyes, mouth, windows, doors) were presented either upright or inverted. Observers first rated the subjective grotesqueness of all of the images and then performed a complete identification task in which they had to identify the orientation of the overall form and the orientation of each of the interior features. Grotesqueness ratings for both classes of image showed the standard modulation of rated grotesqueness as a function of orientation. The complete identification results revealed violations of both perceptual and decisional separability but failed to reveal any violations of within-stimulus (perceptual) independence. In addition, exploration of a simple bivariate Gaussian signal detection model of the relationship between identification performance and judged grotesqueness suggests that within-stimulus violations of perceptual independence on their own are insufficient for producing the illusion. This lack of evidence for within-stimulus configurality suggests the need for a critical reevaluation of the role of configural processing in the Thatcher illusion. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved).

[1]  A. Young,et al.  Configurational Information in Face Perception , 1987, Perception.

[2]  W T Maddox,et al.  Separating perceptual processes from decisional processes in identification and categorization , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Quantitative Models of Perceiving and Remembering Faces: Precedents and Possibilities , 1998 .

[4]  S. C. Masin Foundations of perceptual theory , 1993 .

[5]  Mario Fifić,et al.  Parallel versus serial processing and individual differences in high-speed search in human memory , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  William R. Uttal,et al.  On seeing forms , 1988 .

[7]  J T Townsend,et al.  Feature sensitivity, bias, and interdependencies as a function of energy and payoffs , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  T. Wickens Maximum-likelihood estimation of a multivariate Gaussian rating model with excluded data , 1992 .

[9]  P. Bennett,et al.  Inversion Leads to Quantitative, Not Qualitative, Changes in Face Processing , 2004, Current Biology.

[10]  T. Busey,et al.  Seeing faces in the noise: Stochastic activity in perceptual regions of the brain may influence the perception of ambiguous stimuli , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[11]  W. Todd Maddox,et al.  Perceptual and decisional separability. , 1992 .

[12]  M. Tarr,et al.  Becoming a “Greeble” Expert: Exploring Mechanisms for Face Recognition , 1997, Vision Research.

[13]  J. Davidoff,et al.  Object superiority: a comparison of complete and part probes. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[14]  S. Macho Feature sampling in detection: implications for the measurement of perceptual independence. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[15]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Holistic processing of faces: perceptual and decisional components. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[16]  S. Sikström The variance theory of the mirror effect in recognition memory , 2001, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[17]  H. Kadlec,et al.  Invariance of perceptual spaces and perceptual separability of stimulus dimensions. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  D. Massaro,et al.  Models of integration given multiple sources of information. , 1990, Psychological review.

[19]  G. Schwarzer Processing of facial and non-facial visual stimuli in 2–5-year-old children , 2002 .

[20]  K. Cave,et al.  Perceptual dominance of oriented faces mirrors the distribution of orientation tunings in inferotemporal neurons. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[21]  Estes Wk The problem of inference from curves based on group data. , 1956 .

[22]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[23]  F. Gregory Ashby,et al.  Perceptual variability as a fundamental axiom of perceptual science , 1993 .

[24]  Helena Kadlec,et al.  MSDA_2: updated version of software for Multidimensional Signal Detection Analyses , 1999 .

[25]  Jesse S. Husk,et al.  Time course and robustness of ERP object and face differences. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[26]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory: A user's guide, 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[27]  L. Spillmann,et al.  Thatcher Illusion: Dependence on Angle of Rotation , 2000, Perception.

[28]  Allison B. Sekuler,et al.  Spatial frequency tuning of upright and inverted face identification , 2008, Vision Research.

[29]  J. Langlois,et al.  Attractive Faces Are Only Average , 1990 .

[30]  D. Massaro,et al.  Featural evaluation, integration, and judgment of facial affect. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[31]  Neal E A Kroll,et al.  Distinctiveness and the recognition mirror effect: evidence for an item-based criterion placement heuristic. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  Michael J Wenger,et al.  A decisional component of holistic encoding. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[33]  S. Carey,et al.  From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. , 1977, Science.

[34]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[35]  Garrison W. Cottrell,et al.  Task and Spatial Frequency Effects on Face Specialization , 1997, NIPS.

[36]  N. Perrin,et al.  Varieties of perceptual independence. , 1986, Psychological review.

[37]  W T Maddox,et al.  On the relation between decision rules and perceptual representation in multidimensional perceptual categorization , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[38]  P. Thompson,et al.  Margaret Thatcher: A New Illusion , 1980, Perception.

[39]  Michael B. Lewis,et al.  The Lady'S Not for Turning: Rotation of the Thatcher Illusion , 2001, Perception.

[40]  Bruno Rossion,et al.  Does physical interstimulus variance account for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human brain? Ten lessons on the N170 , 2008, NeuroImage.

[41]  T. Parks,et al.  Thatcher and the Cheshire Cat: Context and the Processing of Facial Features , 1985, Perception.

[42]  J. Townsend,et al.  On the costs and benefits of faces and words: process characteristics of feature search in highly meaningful stimuli. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  E Galanter,et al.  A significance test for one parameter isosensitivity functions , 1967, Psychometrika.

[44]  M. Farah,et al.  What is "special" about face perception? , 1998, Psychological review.

[45]  Linda Jeffery,et al.  Now You See It, Now You Don’t , 2010, Psychological science.

[46]  E L Amazeen,et al.  Perceptual independence of size and weight by dynamic touch. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[47]  Michael J Wenger,et al.  Preserving informational separability and violating decisional separability in facial perception and recognition. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[48]  G. Leckie Bulletin of the International Statistical Institute , 2013 .

[49]  M. Wenger,et al.  An Investigation of Perceptual and Decisional Influences on the Perception of Hierarchical Forms , 2006, Perception.

[50]  B. Murdock The mirror effect and attention-likelihood theory: a reflective analysis. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[51]  Children's perception of the Thatcher illusion: Evidence for development in configural face processing , 2003 .

[52]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Faces as Gestalt stimuli: Process characteristics. , 2001 .

[53]  Allison B. Sekuler,et al.  The effects of face inversion and contrast-reversal on efficiency and internal noise , 2008, Vision Research.

[54]  Claus-Christian Carbon,et al.  The Thatcher illusion seen by the brain: an event-related brain potentials study. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[55]  W. Estes The problem of inference from curves based on group data. , 1956, Psychological bulletin.

[56]  J. Townsend,et al.  Stochastic dependencies in parallel and serial models: effects on systems factorial interactions , 1994 .

[57]  Leslie M. Blaha,et al.  Multiple methods of modeling and detecting perceptual and cognitive configurality , 2009 .

[58]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Comparing neural correlates of configural processing in faces and objects: An ERP study of the Thatcher illusion , 2006, NeuroImage.

[59]  T. Hendler,et al.  Feeling or Features Different Sensitivity to Emotion in High-Order Visual Cortex and Amygdala , 2001, Neuron.

[60]  Gillian Rhodes,et al.  What's lost in inverted faces? , 1993, Cognition.

[61]  Gregory Ashby,et al.  On the Dangers of Averaging Across Subjects When Using Multidimensional Scaling or the Similarity-Choice Model , 1994 .

[62]  R D Thomas,et al.  Perceptual interactions of facial dimensions in speeded classification and identification , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[63]  James T. Townsend,et al.  Implications of marginal and conditional detection parameters for the separabilities and independence of perceptual dimensions , 1992 .

[64]  J. Tanaka,et al.  Features and their configuration in face recognition , 1997, Memory & cognition.

[65]  S. Carey Becoming a face expert. , 1992, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[66]  J. Bartlett,et al.  Inversion and Configuration of Faces , 1993, Cognitive Psychology.

[67]  James T. Townsend,et al.  A test of visual feature sampling independence with orthogonal straight lines , 1980 .

[68]  M. Farah,et al.  Parts and Wholes in Face Recognition , 1993, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[69]  T. Wickens Elementary Signal Detection Theory , 2001 .

[70]  Jennifer J. Richler,et al.  Distinguishing Between Perceptual and Decisional Sources of Holism in Face Processing , 2007 .

[71]  Michael J Wenger,et al.  A strong test of the dual-mode hypothesis , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[72]  Robin D. Thomas,et al.  Evidence for criterion shifts in visual perceptual learning: Data and implications , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[73]  Robin D. Thomas Processing time predictions of current models of perception in the classic additive factors paradigm , 2006 .

[74]  J. Townsend,et al.  Computational, Geometric, and Process Perspectives on Facial Cognition : Contexts and Challenges , 2005 .