Neural tuning for face wholes and parts in human fusiform gyrus revealed by FMRI adaptation.

Although the right fusiform face area (FFA) is often linked to holistic processing, new data suggest this region also encodes part-based face representations. We examined this question by assessing the metric of neural similarity for faces using a continuous carryover functional MRI (fMRI) design. Using faces varying along dimensions of eye and mouth identity, we tested whether these axes are coded independently by separate part-tuned neural populations or conjointly by a single population of holistically tuned neurons. Consistent with prior results, we found a subadditive adaptation response in the right FFA, as predicted for holistic processing. However, when holistic processing was disrupted by misaligning the halves of the face, the right FFA continued to show significant adaptation, but in an additive pattern indicative of part-based neural tuning. Thus this region seems to contain neural populations capable of representing both individual parts and their integration into a face gestalt. A third experiment, which varied the asymmetry of changes in the eye and mouth identity dimensions, also showed part-based tuning from the right FFA. In contrast to the right FFA, the left FFA consistently showed a part-based pattern of neural tuning across all experiments. Together, these data support the existence of both part-based and holistic neural tuning within the right FFA, further suggesting that such tuning is surprisingly flexible and dynamic.

[1]  J. Tanaka,et al.  The NimStim set of facial expressions: Judgments from untrained research participants , 2009, Psychiatry Research.

[2]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  When is scene identification just texture recognition? , 2004, Vision Research.

[3]  D. Maurer,et al.  The many faces of configural processing , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  B. Murphy,et al.  Adaptation to natural facial categories , 2022 .

[5]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The Neural Basis of the Behavioral Face-Inversion Effect , 2005, Current Biology.

[6]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The Fusiform Face Area: A Module in Human Extrastriate Cortex Specialized for Face Perception , 1997, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[7]  Heather Buttle,et al.  High familiarity enhances visual change detection for face stimuli , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Bruno Rossion,et al.  Faces are represented holistically in the human occipito-temporal cortex , 2006, NeuroImage.

[9]  I. Gauthier,et al.  Perceptual interference supports a non-modular account of face processing , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[10]  M. Behrmann,et al.  Impact of learning on representation of parts and wholes in monkey inferotemporal cortex , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  T. Allison,et al.  Face-Specific Processing in the Human Fusiform Gyrus , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[13]  R. Henson Neuroimaging studies of priming , 2003, Progress in Neurobiology.

[14]  Roberto Cabeza,et al.  Features are Also Important: Contributions of Featural and Configural Processing to Face Recognition , 2000, Psychological science.

[15]  G. Boynton,et al.  Selectivity for the configural cues that identify the gender, ethnicity, and identity of faces in human cortex , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[16]  A. Treves,et al.  Morphing Marilyn into Maggie dissociates physical and identity face representations in the brain , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[17]  Lawrence L. Wald,et al.  Accurate prediction of V1 location from cortical folds in a surface coordinate system , 2008, NeuroImage.

[18]  Hervé Abdi,et al.  What Are the Routes to Face Recognition , 2003 .

[19]  D. Perrett,et al.  Visual neurones responsive to faces in the monkey temporal cortex , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

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

[21]  M. Webster,et al.  Visual adaptation: Neural, psychological and computational aspects , 2007, Vision Research.

[22]  R. Yin Looking at Upside-down Faces , 1969 .

[23]  A. Young,et al.  Matching Familiar and Unfamiliar Faces on Internal and External Features , 1985, Perception.

[24]  Jason M Haberman,et al.  Seeing the mean: ensemble coding for sets of faces. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[25]  Stephen A Engel,et al.  Adaptation of Oriented and Unoriented Color-Selective Neurons in Human Visual Areas , 2005, Neuron.

[26]  Geoffrey Karl Aguirre,et al.  Continuous carry-over designs for fMRI , 2007, NeuroImage.

[27]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Face perception: domain specific, not process specific. , 2004, Neuron.

[28]  H. Wilson,et al.  fMRI evidence for the neural representation of faces , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[29]  T. Allison,et al.  Electrophysiological studies of human face perception. II: Response properties of face-specific potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex. , 1999, Cerebral cortex.

[30]  W. R. Garner The Processing of Information and Structure , 1974 .

[31]  Kenji Kawano,et al.  Global and fine information coded by single neurons in the temporal visual cortex , 1999, Nature.

[32]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[33]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Analysis of fMRI Time-Series Revisited—Again , 1995, NeuroImage.

[34]  M. Webster,et al.  Adaptation to natural facial categories , 2002, Nature.

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

[36]  M. Posner,et al.  On the genesis of abstract ideas. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[37]  J. Bartlett,et al.  Inversion and processing of component and spatial–relational information in faces. , 1996 .

[38]  A. Parkin,et al.  Cerebral Lateralisation at Different Stages of Facial Processing , 1987, Cortex.

[39]  Wesley T. Kerr,et al.  Distinguishing conjoint and independent neural tuning for stimulus features with fMRI adaptation. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[41]  B. Rossion Picture-plane inversion leads to qualitative changes of face perception. , 2008, Acta psychologica.

[42]  Alison Harris,et al.  The Representation of Parts and Wholes in Face-selective Cortex , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[43]  Doris Y. Tsao,et al.  A face feature space in the macaque temporal lobe , 2009, Nature Neuroscience.

[44]  Fred W Mast,et al.  Perception of Novel Faces: The Parts Have it! , 2007, Perception.

[45]  M. D’Esposito,et al.  The Variability of Human, BOLD Hemodynamic Responses , 1998, NeuroImage.

[46]  V. Bruce,et al.  Do the eyes have it? Cues to the direction of social attention , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[47]  M. D’Esposito,et al.  The variability of human BOLD hemodynamic responses , 1998, NeuroImage.

[48]  M. Riesenhuber,et al.  Evaluation of a Shape-Based Model of Human Face Discrimination Using fMRI and Behavioral Techniques , 2006, Neuron.

[49]  G. Yovel,et al.  Why does picture-plane inversion sometimes dissociate perception of features and spacing in faces, and sometimes not? Toward a new theory of holistic processing , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[50]  J. Bartlett,et al.  Inversion and processing of component and spatial-relational information in faces. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[51]  R. Shepard Attention and the metric structure of the stimulus space. , 1964 .

[52]  F. Wörgötter,et al.  Context, state and the receptive fields of striatal cortex cells , 2000, Trends in Neurosciences.