Cross-modal processing of voices and faces in developmental prosopagnosia and developmental phonagnosia

Maguinness, Corrina; Kriegstein, Katharina von

doi:10.1080/13506285.2017.1313347

Cited by 10 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 108 publications

(198 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That said, and as already noted, it is also clear that the frequent co-occurrence of facial and vocal communicative signals in the natural environment (i.e. the fact that people are often seen and heard at the same time) does lead to a degree of cross-modal integration that is evident in some circumstances [23][24][25]53,54,[69][70][71][72].…”

Section: Functional Demands Of Face and Voice Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 54%

Face and Voice Perception: Understanding Commonalities and Differences

Young

Frühholz

Schweinberger

2020

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

122

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Faces and voices are of high importance in interpersonal communication, and there are notable parallels between face and voice perception. However, these parallels do not sit entirely comfortably with the full range of available evidence. This review evaluates parallels between the functional and neural organisation of face and voice perception, whilst locating these in the context of ways in which faces and voices also differ. It takes the discussion to the next level by asking why these commonalities and differences exist. A novel synthesis is offered, grounded in the interaction between intrinsic characteristics of faces and voices and the demands of everyday life, showing how the pattern of findings reflects a system that can respond optimally to different everyday demands. Highlights• Similarities in functional organisation have led to the proposal of parallel, largely independent processing streams for voices and faces.Linked to this conception is the idea that the voice can be considered to be a kind of 'auditory face'.• However, neuroimaging studies show a strong contribution of multimodal regions that respond both to voices and to faces. Closer examination of neuropsychological and behavioural studies supports this form of organisation.• The contributions of differences between how relatively invariant information (such as a person's identity) and more rapidly changing information (such as their emotional state) must be represented need to be carefully considered.• Understanding the everyday demands of different tasks involving voice and face perception offers a resolution in which these serve as strong drivers of the optimal functional and neural organisation. Young, Frühholz and Schweinberger (cont'd) 3 Understanding face and voice perception Human communication involves complex patterns of signals originating primarily from the face, voice, and body [1]. Whilst much of this communication takes the form of propositional speech, faces and voices can also convey common forms of information concerning a person's gender, age, identity, health and emotional state, and they create impressions of warmth, competence and other social traits [2,3]. Much modern research has therefore focussed on communication from the face and voice [4-9]. This review aims to strengthen theoretical approaches to key properties of face and voice perception. It offers a synthesis of existing evidence based on evaluating functional perspectives (see Glossary) and neural perspectives in light of the overarching background of what can be communicated through faces and voices, the different contingencies thiscreates, the demands of everyday life, and the ways in which these act as determinants of a communicative system that has to balance the needs of the sender and recipient.

show abstract

Section: Functional Demands Of Face and Voice Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 54%

Face and Voice Perception: Understanding Commonalities and Differences

Young

Frühholz

Schweinberger

2020

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

122

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prior observations in neurotypicals suggest no correlation between the face-benefits for speech and voice-identity recognition within participants (von Kriegstein et al, 2008) (e.g., a participant with a high face-benefit for speech will not necessarily also exhibit a high face-benefit for voice-identity recognition), indicating that variability in the face-benefit is unlikely to be governed by a general mechanism. Rather, findings from autism spectrum disorder suggest that the face-benefit for auditory-only speech processing may relate to differences in lip-reading abilities (von Kriegstein, Kleinschmidt and Giraud, 2006;von Kriegstein et al, 2008;Maguinness and von Kriegstein, 2017). While findings from developmental prosopagnosia (McConachie, 1976), i.e., a severe deficit in face-identity processing, implicate intact face-identity processing as a necessary component for the face-benefit on voice-identity processing (von Kriegstein, Kleinschmidt and Giraud, 2006;von Kriegstein et al, 2008;Maguinness and von Kriegstein, 2017).…”

Section: Inter-individual Variability In the Face-benefitmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Potentially, there may be differences in voice-identity and speech processing which may reflect such findings -Voice-identity recognition is inferior to our ability to recognise others by face (Ellis, Jones and Mosdell, 1997;Hanley, Smith and Hadfield, 1998;Hanley and Turner, 2000;Hanley and Damjanovic, 2009; review see Stevenage and Neil, 2014). It is therefore likely that interactions between the voice and face systems fundamentally support familiar voice-identity recognition (Jones and Tranel, 2001;von Kriegstein, Kleinschmidt and Giraud, 2006;Maguinness and von Kriegstein, 2017). These cross-modal effects may therefore be more readily observed for voiceidentity recognition, even at lower SNRs, when the auditory signal is relatively salient (Sheffert and Olson, 2004;von Kriegstein et al, 2008;Schall et al, 2013;Schelinski, Riedel and von Kriegstein, 2014).…”

Section: Differences In the Visual Mechanisms Underpinning The Face-benefit For Speech And Voice-identity Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prior audio-visual learning facilitates auditory-only speech and voice-identity recognition in noisy listening conditions

Maguinness¹,

Schall²,

Kriegstein³

2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Perception of human communication signals is often more robust when there is concurrent input from the auditory and visual sensory modality. For instance, seeing the dynamic articulatory movements of a speaker, in addition to hearing their voice, can help with understanding what is said. This is particularly evident in noisy listening conditions. Even in the absence of concurrent visual input, visual mechanisms continue to be recruited to optimise auditory processing: auditory-only speech and voice-identity recognition is superior for speakers who have been previously learned with their corresponding face, in comparison to an audio-visual control condition; an effect termed the “face-benefit”. Whether the face-benefit can assist in maintaining robust perception in noisy listening conditions, in a similar manner to concurrent visual input, is currently unknown. Here, in two behavioural experiments, we explicitly examined this hypothesis. In each experiment, participants learned a series of speakers’ voices together with their corresponding dynamic face, or a visual control image depicting the speaker’s occupation. Following learning, participants listened to auditory-only sentences spoken by the same speakers and were asked to recognise the content of the sentences (i.e., speech recognition, Experiment 1) or the identity of the speaker (i.e., voice-identity recognition, Experiment 2) in different levels of increasing auditory noise (SNR +4 dB to -8 dB). For both speech and voice-identity recognition, we observed that for participants who showed a face-benefit, the benefit increased with the degree of noise in the auditory signal (Experiment 1, 2). Taken together, these results support an audio-visual model of human auditory communication and suggest that the brain has developed a flexible system to deal with auditory uncertainty – learned visual mechanisms are recruited to enhance the recognition of the auditory signal.

show abstract

“…This behavioural enhancement, termed the ‘face‐benefit’, emerges rapidly following approximately 2 min of audio‐visual experience with the speaker's identity (von Kriegstein et al, 2008 ). The face‐benefit is observed in the majority of neurotypical participants (i.e., 76%—von Kriegstein et al, 2008 ; Maguinness, Schall, & von Kriegstein, 2021 ) and might be one of the reasons why most of us recognise familiar voices with such ease (Lavan, Burton, Scott, & McGettigan, 2019 ; Maguinness, Roswandowitz, & von Kriegstein, 2018 ; Maguinness & von Kriegstein, 2017 ; Sidtis & Kreiman, 2012 ; Stevenage, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual mechanisms for voice‐identity recognition flexibly adjust to auditory noise level

Maguinness

Kriegstein

2021

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognising the identity of voices is a key ingredient of communication. Visual mechanisms support this ability: recognition is better for voices previously learned with their corresponding face (compared to a control condition). This so-called 'face-benefit' is supported by the fusiform face area (FFA), a region sensitive to facial form and identity. Behavioural findings indicate that the face-benefit increases in noisy listening conditions. The neural mechanisms for this increase are unknown. Here, using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we examined responses in face-sensitive regions while participants recognised the identity of auditory-only speakers (previously learned by face) in high (SNR À4 dB) and low (SNR +4 dB) levels of auditory noise. We observed a face-benefit in both noise levels, for most participants (16 of 21). In high-noise, the recognition of face-learned speakers engaged the right posterior superior temporal sulcus motion-sensitive face area (pSTS-mFA), a region implicated in the processing of dynamic facial cues. The face-benefit in high-noise also correlated positively with increased functional connectivity between this region and voice-sensitive regions in the temporal lobe in the group of 16 participants with a behavioural face-benefit. In low-noise, the face-benefit was robustly associated with increased responses in the FFA and to a lesser extent the right pSTS-mFA. The findings highlight the remarkably adaptive nature of the visual network supporting voiceidentity recognition in auditory-only listening conditions.

show abstract

Cross-modal processing of voices and faces in developmental prosopagnosia and developmental phonagnosia

Cited by 10 publications

References 108 publications

Face and Voice Perception: Understanding Commonalities and Differences

Face and Voice Perception: Understanding Commonalities and Differences

Prior audio-visual learning facilitates auditory-only speech and voice-identity recognition in noisy listening conditions

Visual mechanisms for voice‐identity recognition flexibly adjust to auditory noise level

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About