Effect of Familiarity and Viewpoint on Face Recognition in Chimpanzees

Numerous studies have shown that familiarity strongly influences how well humans recognize faces. This is particularly true when faces are encountered across a change in viewpoint. In this situation, recognition may be accomplished by matching partial or incomplete information about a face to a stored representation of the known individual, whereas such representations are not available for unknown faces. Chimpanzees, our closest living relatives, share many of the same behavioral specializations for face processing as humans, but the influence of familiarity and viewpoint have never been compared in the same study. Here, we examined the ability of chimpanzees to match the faces of familiar and unfamiliar conspecifics in their frontal and 3/4 views using a computerized task. Results showed that, while chimpanzees were able to accurately match both familiar and unfamiliar faces in their frontal orientations, performance was significantly impaired only when unfamiliar faces were presented across a change in viewpoint. Therefore, like in humans, face processing in chimpanzees appears to be sensitive to individual familiarity. We propose that familiarization is a robust mechanism for strengthening the representation of faces and has been conserved in primates to achieve efficient individual recognition over a range of natural viewing conditions.

[1]  Hisao Nishijo,et al.  Differential characteristics of face neuron responses within the anterior superior temporal sulcus of macaques. , 2005, Journal of neurophysiology.

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

[3]  V. Bruce,et al.  The basis of the 3/4 view advantage in face recognition , 1987 .

[4]  L. Parr,et al.  The evolution of face processing in primates , 2011, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[5]  H. Wilson,et al.  Size-invariant but viewpoint-dependent representation of faces , 2006, Vision Research.

[6]  L. Parr,et al.  Visual kin recognition in nonhuman primates: (Pan troglodytes and Macaca mulatta): inbreeding avoidance or male distinctiveness? , 2010, Journal of comparative psychology.

[7]  Andrew J. Edmonds,et al.  Familiar and unfamiliar face recognition: A review , 2009, Memory.

[8]  P. Hancock,et al.  Robust representations for face recognition: The power of averages , 2005, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  E. Rolls,et al.  Selective Perceptual Impairments After Perirhinal Cortex Ablation , 2001, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[10]  V. Bruce.  Changing faces: visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition. , 1982, British journal of psychology.

[11]  A. J. Mistlin,et al.  Visual cells in the temporal cortex sensitive to face view and gaze direction , 1985, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[12]  Andy C. H. Lee,et al.  Medial temporal lobe activity during complex discrimination of faces, objects, and scenes: Effects of viewpoint , 2009, Hippocampus.

[13]  E. Rosch,et al.  Categorization of Natural Objects , 1981 .

[14]  M. Hasselmo,et al.  The effect of learning on the face selective responses of neurons in the cortex in the superior temporal sulcus of the monkey , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[15]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Face recognition, pose and ecological validity. , 1987 .

[16]  E. McKone.  Configural processing and face viewpoint. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  M. Tarr,et al.  Mental rotation and orientation-dependence in shape recognition , 1989, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  L. Parr,et al.  Three studies on configural face processing by chimpanzees , 2006, Brain and Cognition.

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

[20]  Frances L. Krouse.  Effects of pose, pose change, and delay on face recognition performance. , 1981 .

[21]  T. Valentine,et al.  Recognizing Unfamiliar Faces: The Effects of Distinctiveness and View , 1999, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[22]  J. Taubert,et al.  When You Turn the other Cheek: A Preference for Novel Viewpoints of Familiar Faces , 2010, Perception.

[23]  P. Schyns,et al.  Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition , 1997, Cognition.

[24]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Broadly tuned, view-specific coding of face shape: Opposing figural aftereffects can be induced in different views , 2007, Vision Research.

[25]  S. Carey,et al.  Why faces are and are not special: an effect of expertise. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

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

[27]  L. Parr,et al.  Why Faces May Be Special: Evidence of the Inversion Effect in Chimpanzees , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[28]  G. Hole,et al.  Is There a Linear or a Nonlinear Relationship between Rotation and Configural Processing of Faces? , 2002, Perception.

[29]  H H Bülthoff,et al.  Psychophysical support for a two-dimensional view interpolation theory of object recognition. , 1992, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  D Kersten,et al.  Viewpoint-Dependent Recognition of Familiar Faces , 1999, Perception.

[31]  Ryan T Maloney,et al.  Things are Looking up: Differential Decline in Face Recognition following Pitch and Yaw Rotation , 2007, Perception.

[32]  V. Bruce,et al.  Effects of lighting on the perception of facial surfaces. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  M. Harries,et al.  Viewer-centred and object-centred coding of heads in the macaque temporal cortex , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[34]  Jennifer J. Pokorny,et al.  Face recognition in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). , 2009, Journal of comparative psychology.

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

[36]  T. Valentine.  Upside-down faces: a review of the effect of inversion upon face recognition. , 1988, British journal of psychology.

[37]  HighWire Press.  Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London , 1781, The London Medical Journal.

[38]  J. Winslow,et al.  Recognizing facial cues: individual discrimination by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). , 2000, Journal of comparative psychology.

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

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

[41]  G. V. Hoesen,et al.  Face recognition in the rhesus monkey , 1979, Neuropsychologia.

[42]  Mary A. Peterson,et al.  Multiple perceptual strategies used by macaque monkeys for face recognition , 2008, Animal Cognition.

[43]  Timothy J. Andrews,et al.  Distinct representations for facial identity and changeable aspects of faces in the human temporal lobe , 2004, NeuroImage.

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

[45]  V Bruce,et al.  The Use of Pigmentation and Shading Information in Recognising the Sex and Identities of Faces , 1994, Perception.

[46]  Doris Y. Tsao,et al.  A Cortical Region Consisting Entirely of Face-Selective Cells , 2006, Science.

[47]  B. Stephan,et al.  What is in a View? The Role of Featural Information in the Recognition of Unfamiliar Faces across Viewpoint Transformation , 2007, Perception.

[48]  T. Poggio,et al.  A network that learns to recognize three-dimensional objects , 1990, Nature.