Iconic faces are not real faces: enhanced emotion detection and altered neural processing as faces become more iconic

Iconic representations are ubiquitous; they fill children’s cartoons, add humor to newspapers, and bring emotional tone to online communication. Yet, the communicative function they serve remains unaddressed by cognitive psychology. Here, we examined the hypothesis that iconic representations communicate emotional information more efficiently than their realistic counterparts. In Experiment 1, we manipulated low-level features of emotional faces to create five sets of stimuli that ranged from photorealistic to fully iconic. Participants identified emotions on briefly presented faces. Results showed that, at short presentation times, accuracy for identifying emotion on more “cartoonized” images was enhanced. In addition, increasing contrast and decreasing featural complexity benefited accuracy. In Experiment 2, we examined an event-related potential component, the P1, which is sensitive to low-level visual stimulus features. Lower levels of contrast and complexity within schematic stimuli were also associated with lower P1 amplitudes. These findings support the hypothesis that iconic representations differ from realistic images in their ability to communicate specific information, including emotion, quickly and efficiently, and that this effect is driven by changes in low-level visual features in the stimuli.

[1]  W. Mcdonald,et al.  Visual Evoked Response in Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis , 1973, British medical journal.

[2]  P. Ekman,et al.  The Duchenne smile: emotional expression and brain physiology. II. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  A. Zaher Visual and Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potentials in Neurology , 2012 .

[4]  Martin Wolpers,et al.  We Have No Feelings, We Have Emoticons ;-) , 2012, 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies.

[5]  Doris Y. Tsao,et al.  A Cortical Region Consisting Entirely of Face-Selective Cells , 2006, Science.

[6]  S. Fukusako,et al.  Freezing Characteristics of Layered Air-Water Flow in a Horizontal Circular Tube , 2012 .

[7]  J. Hinojosa,et al.  N170 sensitivity to facial expression: A meta-analysis , 2015, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[8]  G. Woodman A brief introduction to the use of event-related potentials in studies of perception and attention. , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[9]  W. Ziegler The Oxford Handbook Of Event Related Potential Components , 2016 .

[10]  N. Sagiv,et al.  Structural Encoding of Human and Schematic Faces: Holistic and Part-Based Processes , 2001, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  M. Eimer The Face-Sensitive N170 Component of the Event-Related Brain Potential , 2011 .

[12]  Margot J. Taylor Non-spatial attentional effects on P1 , 2002, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[13]  Bruno Rossion,et al.  Faces are "spatial"--holistic face perception is supported by low spatial frequencies. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  Türk Fen,et al.  Concept Cartoons: What Have We Learnt? * , 2013 .

[15]  B. Rossion Understanding face perception by means of human electrophysiology , 2014, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[16]  C. Marsden,et al.  Visual evoked responses in the diagnosis and management of patients suspected of multiple sclerosis. , 1975, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[17]  Roxane J. Itier,et al.  Species sensitivity of early face and eye processing , 2011, NeuroImage.

[18]  T. Allison,et al.  Electrophysiological Studies of Face Perception in Humans , 1996, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  Wendy J Adams,et al.  Faces and awareness: low-level, not emotional factors determine perceptual dominance. , 2013, Emotion.

[20]  E. Jafarzadehpur,et al.  P100 Wave Latency in Anisometropic and Esotropic Amblyopia versus Normal Eyes , 2015, Journal of ophthalmic & vision research.

[21]  K. Ciuffreda,et al.  Effect of luminance on the visually-evoked potential in visually-normal individuals and in mTBI/concussion , 2015, Brain injury.

[22]  Jonathan W. Peirce,et al.  PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python , 2007, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[23]  T. Kline,et al.  Visibility Distance of Highway Signs among Young, Middle-Aged, and Older Observers: Icons Are Better than Text , 1990, Human factors.

[24]  O. Churches,et al.  Emoticons in mind: An event-related potential study , 2014, Social neuroscience.

[25]  S. Luck,et al.  The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components , 2011 .

[26]  Leslie G. Ungerleider,et al.  Visual awareness and the detection of fearful faces. , 2005, Emotion.

[27]  Stuart Naylor,et al.  Concept cartoons, teaching and learning in science : an evaluation , 1999 .

[28]  Colin W. G. Clifford,et al.  Corrections to: gaze categorization under uncertainty: psychophysics and modeling , 2013 .

[29]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Is the Fusiform Face Area Specialized for Faces, Individuation, or Expert Individuation? , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[30]  S. Ogawa,et al.  Involvement of low-level visual areas in hemispheric superiority for face processing , 2011, Brain Research.

[31]  S. Tobimatsu,et al.  Neural responses in the occipital cortex to unrecognizable faces , 2011, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[32]  D. Maurer,et al.  Similarities and differences in the perceptual structure of facial expressions of children and adults. , 2010, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[33]  P. Ekman,et al.  Pan-Cultural Elements in Facial Displays of Emotion , 1969, Science.

[34]  Urs Maurer,et al.  The face-specific N170 component is modulated by emotional facial expression , 2007, Behavioral and Brain Functions.

[35]  Simon J. Thorpe,et al.  Low-Level Cues and Ultra-Fast Face Detection , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[36]  Margot J. Taylor,et al.  The Faces of Development: A Review of Early Face Processing over Childhood , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[37]  S. Luck,et al.  Visual event related potentials and attention , 1990 .

[38]  R. Blake,et al.  Fearful expressions gain preferential access to awareness during continuous flash suppression. , 2007, Emotion.

[39]  M. Eimer,et al.  Effects of contrast inversion on face perception depend on gaze location: Evidence from the N170 component , 2016, Cognitive neuroscience.

[40]  S. Rauch,et al.  Masked Presentations of Emotional Facial Expressions Modulate Amygdala Activity without Explicit Knowledge , 1998, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[41]  B. Rossion,et al.  ERP evidence for the speed of face categorization in the human brain: Disentangling the contribution of low-level visual cues from face perception , 2011, Vision Research.

[42]  Ling Wang,et al.  Neural responses to cartoon facial attractiveness: An event-related potential study , 2014, Neuroscience Bulletin.

[43]  H. Halit,et al.  Is high-spatial frequency information used in the early stages of face detection? , 2006, Brain Research.

[44]  Margot J. Taylor,et al.  N170 or N1? Spatiotemporal differences between object and face processing using ERPs. , 2004, Cerebral cortex.

[45]  Yu-Hui Tao,et al.  The effect of emoticons in simplex and complex task-oriented communication: An empirical study of instant messaging , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[46]  Neil Cohn,et al.  Visual Narrative Structure , 2013, Cogn. Sci..

[47]  B. Oken,et al.  Normal temporal variability of the P100. , 1987, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[48]  S. Chien No more top-heavy bias: infants and adults prefer upright faces but not top-heavy geometric or face-like patterns. , 2011, Journal of vision.

[49]  C. Deruelle,et al.  Typical Emotion Processing for Cartoon but not for Real Faces in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorders , 2008, Journal of autism and developmental disorders.

[50]  Brittany S. Cassidy,et al.  Lower-Level Stimulus Features Strongly Influence Responses in the Fusiform Face Area , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[51]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials , 2014, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[52]  Scott D. Slotnick,et al.  The Fusiform Face Area , 2013 .

[53]  Scott McCloud Understanding comics: the invisible art = Memahami komik / Scott McCloud; penerjemah S. Kinanti , 2001 .

[54]  Donald M. MacKay,et al.  Visually Evoked Potentials and Visual Perception in Man , 1973 .

[55]  James A Desjardins,et al.  Deconstructing the early visual electrocortical responses to face and house stimuli. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[56]  J. Piven,et al.  Looking you in the mouth: abnormal gaze in autism resulting from impaired top-down modulation of visual attention. , 2006, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.