The Vanderbilt holistic face processing test: a short and reliable measure of holistic face processing.

Efforts to understand individual differences in high-level vision necessitate the development of measures that have sufficient reliability, which is generally not a concern in group studies. Holistic processing is central to research on face recognition and, more recently, to the study of individual differences in this area. However, recent work has shown that the most popular measure of holistic processing, the composite task, has low reliability. This is particularly problematic for the recent surge in interest in studying individual differences in face recognition. Here, we developed and validated a new measure of holistic face processing specifically for use in individual-differences studies. It avoids some of the pitfalls of the standard composite design and capitalizes on the idea that trial variability allows for better traction on reliability. Across four experiments, we refine this test and demonstrate its reliability.

[1]  Jeremy Wilmer,et al.  Using regression to measure holistic face processing reveals a strong link with face recognition ability , 2013, Cognition.

[2]  Louis Guttman,et al.  A basis for analyzing test-retest reliability , 1945, Psychometrika.

[3]  Cindy M. Bukach,et al.  Individuation experience predicts other-race effects in holistic processing for both Caucasian and Black participants , 2012, Cognition.

[4]  H. G. Osburn,et al.  An Empirical Comparison of Coefficient Alpha, Guttman's Lambda-2, and MSPLIT Maximized Split-Half Reliability Estimates. , 1979 .

[5]  David Rogosa,et al.  A growth curve approach to the measurement of change. , 1982 .

[6]  I. Gauthier,et al.  Conditions for Facelike Expertise with Objects Becoming a Ziggerin Expert—but Which Type? , 2022 .

[7]  J. Nunnally.  Introduction to Psychological Measurement , 1970 .

[8]  Jennifer J. Richler,et al.  Context influences holistic processing of nonface objects in the composite task , 2009, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[9]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  A meta-analysis and review of holistic face processing. , 2014, Psychological bulletin.

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

[11]  Allison B Sekuler,et al.  Holistic Processing Is Not Correlated With Face-Identification Accuracy , 2010, Psychological science.

[12]  Jennifer J. Richler,et al.  Becoming a Lunari or Taiyo expert: learned attention to parts drives holistic processing of faces. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Ruosi Wang,et al.  Individual Differences in Holistic Processing Predict Face Recognition Ability , 2012, Psychological science.

[14]  Daniel C. Krawczyk,et al.  Chess Masters Show a Hallmark of Face Processing with Chess , 2022 .

[15]  I. Gauthier,et al.  Face composite effects reveal abnormal face processing in Autism spectrum disorders , 2009, Vision Research.

[16]  Rankin W. McGugin,et al.  The Vanderbilt Expertise Test reveals domain-general and domain-specific sex effects in object recognition , 2012, Vision Research.

[17]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Reliability of composite-task measurements of holistic face processing , 2015, Behavior research methods.

[18]  M. Tarr,et al.  Training ‘greeble’ experts: a framework for studying expert object recognition processes , 1998, Vision Research.

[19]  J. Brigham,et al.  Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review , 2001 .

[20]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Inverted faces are (eventually) processed holistically , 2011, Vision Research.

[21]  Javid Sadr,et al.  Object recognition and Random Image Structure Evolution , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[22]  Cindy M. Bukach,et al.  Limits of generalization between categories and implications for theories of category specificity , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[23]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Holistic Processing Predicts Face Recognition , 2011, Psychological science.

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

[25]  K. Nakayama,et al.  The Cambridge Face Memory Test: Results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants , 2006, Neuropsychologia.

[26]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Where cognitive development and aging meet: Face learning ability peaks after age 30 , 2011, Cognition.

[27]  Jennifer J. Richler,et al.  Other-race effects manifest in overall performance, not qualitative processing style , 2014 .

[28]  Cindy M. Bukach,et al.  Holistic processing as a hallmark of perceptual expertise for nonface categories including Chinese characters. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[29]  L. Gottschalk,et al.  Guidelines for Authors , 2015, Avian diseases.

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

[31]  Hongjing Lu,et al.  Two forms of aftereffects induced by transparent motion reveal multilevel adaptation. , 2012, Journal of vision.

[32]  Isabel Gauthier,et al.  Holistic processing in the composite task depends on face size , 2015, Visual cognition.

[33]  Jennifer J. Richler,et al.  Meanings, Mechanisms, and Measures of Holistic Processing , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[34]  E. McKone,et al.  Holistic processing for faces operates over a wide range of sizes but is strongest at identification rather than conversational distances , 2009, Vision Research.

[35]  D. Watson,et al.  Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.