Gaze behavior in analytical and holistic face processing

We conducted two experiments examining children’s and adults’ gaze behavior when processing faces analytically (focusing on a single feature) or holistically (comparing the overall similarity of the faces). Children 6–8 and 9–10 years of age and adults were instructed to assign schematically drawn faces in Experiment 1 and photos of real faces in Experiment 2 to two categories. The categories were constructed so as to allow either an analytical or holistic categorization of the faces. During all trials, gaze behavior was recorded from stimulus onset until reaction. The location and duration of the fixations used were analyzed. Whereas the holistic processors fixated the whole area of the eyes and nose most and longest independently of age, analytical processors showed a more feature-specific gaze behavior, focusing their fixations upon the particular feature used for subsequent processing. Thus, differences in analytical and holistic face processing can be detected early in gaze behavior—that is, at the visual encoding stage.

[1]  G. Hole,et al.  Featural and Configurational Processes in the Recognition of Faces of Different Familiarity , 2000, Perception.

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

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

[4]  Biases in eye movements to threatening facial expressions in generalized anxiety disorder and depressive disorder. , 2000 .

[5]  S. Carey,et al.  Why faces are and are not special: an effect of expertise. , 1986 .

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

[7]  O. Grüsser,et al.  Gaze motor asymmetries in the perception of faces during a memory task , 1993, Neuropsychologia.

[8]  H. Leder,et al.  Your eyes only? A test of interactive influence in the processing of facial features. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  L F Dell'Osso,et al.  Eyes as the Center of Focus in the Visual Examination of Human Faces , 1978, Perceptual and motor skills.

[10]  H. Engeland,et al.  Gaze behavior of children with pervasive developmental disorder toward human faces: a fixation time study. , 2002, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[11]  A. Freire,et al.  The Face-Inversion Effect as a Deficit in the Encoding of Configural Information: Direct Evidence , 2000, Perception.

[12]  G. Schwarzer,et al.  Development of face processing: the effect of face inversion. , 2000, Child development.

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

[14]  K. Yamashita,et al.  Comparison of Eye-Movement Patterns in Schizophrenic and Normal Adults during Examination of Facial Affect Displays , 2000, Perceptual and motor skills.

[15]  Nikolaus F. Troje,et al.  Separation of texture and shape in images of faces for image coding and synthesis , 1997 .

[16]  T. B. Ward,et al.  Analytic and holistic modes of learning family-resemblance concepts , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[17]  J. Cutting.  The right cerebral hemisphere and psychiatric disorders , 1990 .

[18]  G. Winocur,et al.  What Is Special about Face Recognition? Nineteen Experiments on a Person with Visual Object Agnosia and Dyslexia but Normal Face Recognition , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  Eileen Kowler.  Eye movements and their role in visual and cognitive processes. , 1990, Reviews of oculomotor research.

[20]  D. Jeffreys,et al.  Evoked potential evidence for human brain mechanisms that respond to single, fixated faces , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[21]  Susan Carey,et al.  Chapter 2 – Perceptual Classification and Expertise , 1996 .

[22]  James W. Tanaka,et al.  What causes the face inversion effect , 1995 .

[23]  Adrian Schwaninger,et al.  Role of Featural and Configural Information in Familiar and Unfamiliar Face Recognition , 2002, Biologically Motivated Computer Vision.

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

[25]  V. Bruce,et al.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology When Inverted Faces Are Recognized: the Role of Configural Information in Face Recognition , 2022 .

[26]  R. Bruyer,et al.  Features of laterally displayed faces: saliency or top-down processing? , 1987, Acta psychologica.

[27]  James W. Tanaka,et al.  Face recognition in young children : When the whole is greater than the sum of its parts , 1998 .

[28]  E. Gordon,et al.  Eye movements reflect impaired face processing in patients with schizophrenia , 1999, Biological Psychiatry.

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

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

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

[32]  Sridhar Mahadevan,et al.  14 - Gaze Control for Face Learning and Recognition by Humans and Machines , 2001 .

[33]  D W Massaro,et al.  Modeling face identification processing in children and adults. , 2001, Journal of experimental child psychology.

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