Neurocognitive mechanisms of individual differences in face cognition: A replication and extension

Face cognition performance is related to individual differences in cognitive subprocesses, as reflected in the amplitudes and latencies of event-related brain potentials (ERPs; Herzmann, Kunina, Sommer, & Wilhelm, 2010). In order to replicate and extend these findings, 110 participants were tested on a comprehensive task battery measuring face cognition abilities and established cognitive abilities, followed by ERP recordings in a face-learning-and-recognition task. We replicated the links of the ERP components indicating the speed of structural face encoding (N170 latency) and access to structural representations in memory (early repetition effect [ERE]/N250r) with the accuracy and speed of face cognition and with established cognitive abilities. As a novel result, we differentiated between the accuracy of face perception and face memory on the behavioral and electrophysiological levels and report a relationship between basic visual processes (P100 amplitude) and face memory. Moreover, the brain–behavior relationships for the ERE/N250r held true, even though we eliminated pictorial and perceptual structural codes from the priming effects by using backward masking of the primes with novel unfamiliar faces. On a methodological level, we demonstrated the utility of the latent difference score modeling technique to parameterize ERP difference components (e.g., ERE/N250r) on a latent level and link them to face cognition abilities.

[1]  Werner Sommer,et al.  Individual Differences in Face Cognition: Brain–Behavior Relationships , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  M. Herrmann,et al.  Early stages (P100) of face perception in humans as measured with event-related potentials (ERPs) , 2004, Journal of Neural Transmission.

[3]  A. Burton,et al.  Mental representations of familiar faces. , 2011, British journal of psychology.

[4]  D. Lehmann,et al.  Reference-free identification of components of checkerboard-evoked multichannel potential fields. , 1980, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[5]  A. Burton,et al.  N250r: a face-selective brain response to stimulus repetitions , 2004, Neuroreport.

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

[7]  A. Mike Burton,et al.  N250 ERP Correlates of the Acquisition of Face Representations across Different Images , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[8]  D. W. Zimmerman,et al.  Are Simple Gain Scores Obsolete? , 1996 .

[9]  Werner Sommer,et al.  Memory-related ERP components for experimentally learned faces and names: characteristics and parallel-test reliabilities. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[10]  Stefan R Schweinberger,et al.  What's special about personally familiar faces? A multimodal approach. , 2004, Psychophysiology.

[11]  W. Sommer,et al.  On the specificity of face cognition compared with general cognitive functioning across adult age. , 2011, Psychology and aging.

[12]  Raymond B. Cattell,et al.  Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology , 1968 .

[13]  Yves Rosseel,et al.  lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling , 2012 .

[14]  Brad Duchaine,et al.  Dissociations of Face and Object Recognition in Developmental Prosopagnosia , 2005, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[15]  W. Sommer,et al.  Residue iteration decomposition (RIDE): A new method to separate ERP components on the basis of latency variability in single trials. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[16]  Mark H. Johnson,et al.  Modulation of event‐related potentials by prototypical and atypical faces , 2000, Neuroreport.

[17]  V. Bruce,et al.  Recognition of unfamiliar faces , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[18]  Werner Sommer,et al.  Repetition priming and associative priming of face recognition: Evidence from event-related potentials. , 1995 .

[19]  E Callaway,et al.  Scopolamine effects on visual information processing, attention, and event-related potential map latencies. , 1992, Psychophysiology.

[20]  P Walla,et al.  Early cortical activation indicates preparation for retrieval of memory for faces: an event-related potential study , 1998, Neuroscience Letters.

[21]  Stefan R Schweinberger,et al.  Age-related slowing in face and name recognition: evidence from event-related brain potentials. , 2002, Psychology and aging.

[22]  R. C. Oldfield.  THE ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS OF HANDEDNESS , 1971 .

[23]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Human face recognition ability is specific and highly heritable , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[24]  Werner Sommer,et al.  Knowledge scale effects in face recognition: An electrophysiological investigation , 2011, Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience.

[25]  G D Pearlson,et al.  Determinants of Benton Facial Recognition Test performance in normal adults. , 2001, Neuropsychology.

[26]  Raymond J. Dolan,et al.  Familiarity enhances invariance of face representations in human ventral visual cortex: fMRI evidence , 2005, NeuroImage.

[27]  Investigation of a visual imagery mnemonic device for acquiring face--name associations. , 1980 .

[28]  V. Bruce,et al.  Matching identities of familiar and unfamiliar faces caught on CCTV images. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[29]  Stefan R Schweinberger,et al.  Person perception 25 years after Bruce and Young (1986): an introduction. , 2011, British journal of psychology.

[30]  Adam Gazzaley,et al.  Early Top–Down Control of Visual Processing Predicts Working Memory Performance , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[32]  J. Haxby,et al.  Neural systems for recognition of familiar faces , 2007, Neuropsychologia.

[33]  W. Sommer,et al.  Toward a comprehensive test battery for face cognition: Assessment of the tasks , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[34]  W. Sommer,et al.  PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Individual Differences in Perceiving and Recognizing Faces — One Element of Social Cognition , 2010 .

[35]  Raymond J. Dolan,et al.  Role of Features and Second-order Spatial Relations in Face Discrimination, Face Recognition, and Individual Face Skills: Behavioral and Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data , 2007, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[36]  W. Sommer,et al.  Face and object cognition across adult age. , 2013, Psychology and aging.

[37]  I. Gauthier,et al.  Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

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

[39]  Mark H. Johnson,et al.  Oxford Handbook of Face Perception , 2011 .

[40]  A. Burton,et al.  Brain responses to repetitions of human and animal faces, inverted faces, and objects — An MEG study , 2007, Brain Research.

[41]  J. Mcardle.  Latent variable modeling of differences and changes with longitudinal data. , 2009, Annual review of psychology.

[42]  N. Masataka,et al.  The effects of eye and face inversion on the early stages of gaze direction perception—An ERP study , 2007, Brain Research.

[43]  H. Pashler,et al.  Editors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science , 2012, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[44]  Gabriel Curio,et al.  MEG/EEG sources of the 170-ms response to faces are co-localized in the fusiform gyrus , 2007, NeuroImage.

[45]  W. Sommer,et al.  Structural invariance and age-related performance differences in face cognition. , 2010, Psychology and aging.

[46]  J. Mcardle.  Dynamic but Structural Equation Modeling of Repeated Measures Data , 1988 .

[47]  S. Stigler,et al.  Regression Toward the Mean and the Study of Change , 1980 .

[48]  Claudia Schulz,et al.  High and low performers differ in the use of shape information for face recognition , 2013, Neuropsychologia.

[49]  B. Muthén,et al.  How to Use a Monte Carlo Study to Decide on Sample Size and Determine Power , 2002 .

[50]  A. Burton,et al.  Event-related brain potential evidence for a response of inferior temporal cortex to familiar face repetitions. , 2002, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[51]  Stefan Robert Schweinberger,et al.  Face and object encoding under perceptual load: ERP evidence , 2011, NeuroImage.

[52]  R. C. Oldfield.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[53]  Andrew W Young,et al.  Learning faces from photographs. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[54]  M. Tarr,et al.  Unraveling mechanisms for expert object recognition: bridging brain activity and behavior. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[55]  W. Sommer,et al.  Multiple contributions to priming effects for familiar faces: analyses with backward masking and event-related potentials. , 2011, British journal of psychology.

[56]  Werner Sommer,et al.  Memory systems for structural and semantic knowledge of faces and buildings , 2006, Brain Research.

[57]  Kenneth A. Bollen,et al.  Structural Equations with Latent Variables , 1989 .