Specialised Higher-Level Mechanisms for Facial-Symmetry Perception: Evidence from Orientation-Tuning Functions

Bilateral symmetry is important in many perceptual analyses from low-level figure—ground segmentation to higher-level face and object perception. Despite the success of low-level, image-based symmetry-detection models, these may not provide a complete account of symmetry perception. Better symmetry detection and stronger preferences for symmetry in upright faces than comparable patterns (eg inverted faces) that do not engage specialised face-coding mechanisms suggest a contribution of higher-level mechanisms to symmetry perception. We replicated better symmetry detection and stronger symmetry preferences for upright than inverted faces in experiment 1, and examined their orientation tuning in more detail in experiment 2. Decreasing performance as faces are mis-oriented away from the canonical upright orientation is the signature of specialised face-processing mechanisms, which are engaged less effectively as faces are mis-oriented. Lower-level symmetry-detection mechanisms, which operate better with vertical than horizontal, and horizontal than oblique, axes of symmetry would produce a W-shaped orientation-tuning function. Identical orientation-tuning functions were obtained for symmetry detection and preferences. Both declined with increasing mis-orientation over the 0°–135° range, consistent with a contribution from specialised face-coding mechanisms. Both increased from 135° to 180°, consistent with reliance on lower-level image-based mechanisms for severely mis-oriented faces. Taken together, the results implicate specialised, higher-level mechanisms in the detection of, and preference for, facial symmetry.

[1]  G. Rhodes The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. , 2006, Annual review of psychology.

[2]  A. Little,et al.  Attraction independent of detection suggests special mechanisms for symmetry preferences in human face perception , 2006, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[3]  R. Thornhill,et al.  DEVELOPMENTAL STABILITY, DISEASE AND MEDICINE , 1997, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[4]  Johan Wagemans,et al.  Characteristics and models of human symmetry detection , 1997, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[5]  Wim Vanduffel,et al.  Symmetry activates extrastriate visual cortex in human and nonhuman primates. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[6]  Randy Thornhill,et al.  Facial attractiveness , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

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

[8]  S. Dakin,et al.  The spatial region of integration for visual symmetry detection , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[9]  A. Little,et al.  Evidence against perceptual bias views for symmetry preferences in human faces , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[10]  I. Gauthier,et al.  How does the brain process upright and inverted faces? , 2002, Behavioral and cognitive neuroscience reviews.

[11]  Brian A. Wandell,et al.  Predominantly extra-retinotopic cortical response to pattern symmetry , 2005, NeuroImage.

[12]  P Wenderoth,et al.  The Salience of Vertical Symmetry , 1994, Perception.

[13]  D. Burr,et al.  A feature–based model of symmetry detection , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  E. Kobyliansky,et al.  Fluctuating asymmetry as a possible measure of developmental homeostasis in humans: a review. , 1991, Human biology.

[15]  M. Tarr,et al.  The Fusiform Face Area is Part of a Network that Processes Faces at the Individual Level , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Revisiting the Perception of Upside-Down Faces , 2000, Psychological science.

[17]  H. Wilson,et al.  Perception of head orientation , 2000, Vision Research.

[18]  P. Parsons,et al.  FLUCTUATING ASYMMETRY: AN EPIGENETIC MEASURE OF STRESS , 1990, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

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

[20]  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.

[21]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty , 1998 .

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

[23]  M. Corballis,et al.  The Psychology of Left and Right , 2020 .

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

[25]  I. Biederman Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[26]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  The fusiform face area subserves face perception, not generic within-category identification , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[27]  Christopher W Tyler,et al.  Face configuration processing in the human brain: the role of symmetry. , 2007, Cerebral cortex.

[28]  J. L. Tomkins,et al.  Fluctuating Asymmetry and Sexual Selection: Paradigm Shifts, Publication Bias, and Observer Expectation , 2003 .

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

[30]  Gillian Rhodes,et al.  Higher-level mechanisms detect facial symmetry , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[31]  P Wenderoth,et al.  Detection of Bilateral Symmetry in Complex Biological Images , 2000, Perception.

[32]  R. Thornhill,et al.  Facial attractiveness, developmental stability, and fluctuating asymmetry. , 1994 .

[33]  K. Grill-Spector,et al.  High-resolution imaging reveals highly selective nonface clusters in the fusiform face area , 2006, Nature Neuroscience.