Idiosyncratic facial movements can provide a route to facial identity (review in Roark, Barrett, Spence, Abdi, & O'Toole, 2003). However, it is unclear whether recognizing a face in this way involves the same cognitive or neural mechanisms that are involved in recognizing a static face. Three studies on a developmental prosopagnosic (C.S.) showed that although he is impaired at recognizing static faces, he can discriminate between dynamic identities (Experiments 1a and 1b) and can learn to name individuals on the basis of their idiosyncratic facial movements (Experiment 2), at levels that are comparable to those of matched and undergraduate control groups. These results suggest a possible cognitive dissociation between mechanisms involved in dynamic compared to static face recognition. However, future work is needed to fully understand this dissociation.

Article (Published Version) http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Steede, Leslie L and Hole, Graham J (2006) Repetition priming and recognition of dynamic and static chimeras. Perception, 35 (10). pp. 1367 -1382 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/14916/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse:Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University.Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. This model proposes a number of hypothetical units that are involved in face processing. Face-recognition units (FRUs) are believed to store visual descriptions of known faces. Personal-identity nodes (PINs) allow access to semantic information about familiar faces. Semantic-information units (SIUs) store semantic information about familiar faces (eg whether the person is a film star or a politician). Excitatory links connect units that are associated with the same or related faces, and inhibitory links connect units associated with different or unrelated faces.When the face-recognition system is presented with a familiar face, a FRU corresponding to that face becomes activated. If the level of activation passes a threshold, activation flows from the FRU to the PIN, causing the PIN associated with the familiar face to become active. When the PIN reaches a threshold, the face is recognised as familiar. PIN activation then flows to the SIU link, which allows access to semantic information about familiar faces.The IAC model has been successful in describing various phenomena found in the face-recognition literature (Burton et al 1990). Of particular relevance to this study is that the functional mechanisms are capable of explaining repetition or identity priming. Repetition priming is the facilitation found in recognising a familiar face as a result of it being encountered previously (Bruce and Valentine 1985). Repetition priming is believed to occur because the initial presentation of a familiar face leads to activation of the link between the FRU and PIN for that individual. If the same face is presented later, activation flows more quickly via th...

No abstract