Differential responses in the fusiform region to same-race and other-race faces

Golby, Alexandra J.; Gabrieli, John D. E.; Chiao, Joan Y.; Eberhardt, Jennifer L.

doi:10.1038/90565

Cited by 422 publications

(419 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

368

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Seventh, the FFA is activated more by face identity than variations in eye gaze or expression [9,12], while the STS showed the opposite effects [9]. Eighth, the FFA's activity is modulated during working memory, encoding and recognition tasks involving faces [140][141][142][143][144] and predicted subsequent recognition memory for faces [143]. Taken together, these findings support a key role for the FFA in face recognition.…”

Section: Neural Substrates Of Identity Recognition In Healthy Adults:mentioning

confidence: 65%

Autism and the development of face processing

Golarai

Grill-Spector

Reiss

2006

Clinical Neuroscience Research

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autism is a pervasive developmental condition, characterized by impairments in non-verbal communication, social relationships and stereotypical patterns of behavior. A large body of evidence suggests that several aspects of face processing are impaired in autism, including anomalies in gaze processing, memory for facial identity and recognition of facial expressions of emotion. In search of neural markers of anomalous face processing in autism, much interest has focused on a network of brain regions that are implicated in social cognition and face processing. In this review, we will focus on three such regions, namely the STS for its role in processing gaze and facial movements, the FFA in face detection and identification and the amygdala in processing facial expressions of emotion. Much evidence suggests that a better understanding of the normal development of these specialized regions is essential for discovering the neural bases of face processing anomalies in autism. Thus, we will also examine the available literature on the normal development of face processing. Key unknowns in this research area are the neuro-developmental processes, the role of experience and the interactions among components of the face processing system in shaping each of the specialized regions for processing faces during normal development and in autism. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Association for Research in Nervous and Mental Disease.

show abstract

Section: Neural Substrates Of Identity Recognition In Healthy Adults:mentioning

confidence: 65%

Autism and the development of face processing

Golarai

Grill-Spector

Reiss

2006

Clinical Neuroscience Research

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ability to recognize faces is well developed in humans (see Nelson 2001 for a review), even among the very young (Fagan 1972), and facial stimuli are processed by specialized areas of the human brain (Phelps et al 2000;Golby et al 2001;Lieberman et al 2005;Kanwisher and Yovel 2006). Facial displays are the principal means of conveying affect (Zajonc and Markus 1984;Ekman 1992), and affective arousal is known to precede and guide cognitive processing (Zajonc 1980).…”

Section: Cognitive and Nonverbal Bases Of Candidate Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facial Similarity between Voters and Candidates Causes Influence

Bailenson¹,

Iyengar²,

Yee³

et al. 2008

Public Opinion Quarterly

148

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social science research demonstrates that people are drawn to others perceived as similar. We extend this finding to political candidates by comparing the relative effects of candidate familiarity as well as partisan, issue, gender, and facial similarity on voters' evaluations of candidates. In Experiment 1, during the week of the 2006 Florida gubernatorial race, a national representative sample of voters viewed images of two unfamiliar candidates (Crist and Davis) morphed with either themselves or other voters. Results demonstrated a strong preference for facially similar candidates, despite no conscious awareness of the similarity manipulation. In Experiment 2, one week before the 2004 presidential election, a national representative sample of voters evaluated familiar candidates (Bush and Kerry). Strong partisans were unmoved by the facial similarity manipulation, but weak partisans and independents preferred the candidate with whom their own face had been morphed over the candidate morphed with another voter. In Experiment 3, we compared the effects of policy similarity and facial similarity using a set of prospective 2008 presidential candidates. Even though the effects of party and policy similarity dominated, facial similarity proved a significant cue for unfamiliar candidates. Thus, the evidence across the three studies suggests that even in high-profile elections, voters prefer candidates high in facial similarity, but most strongly with unfamiliar candidates.

show abstract

“…Although recent studies have fundamentally improved our knowledge of how the brain modulates norm compliance [Baumgartner et al, 2008[Baumgartner et al, , 2009Delgado et al, 2005;Harbaugh et al, 2007;King-Casas et al, 2005;Rilling et al, 2002;Spitzer et al, 2007] and norm enforcement [Buckholtz et al, 2008;de Quervain et al, 2004;Fehr and Camerer, 2007;Knoch et al, 2006Knoch et al, , 2008Rangel et al, 2008;Sanfey, 2007;Sanfey et al, 2003;Strobel et al, 2011] they do not examine the parochial nature of this phenomena. There is also an important literature examining the neural circuitry of the cognitions involved in the evaluation of faces from distinct races [Cunningham et al, 2004;Golby et al, 2001;Phelps et al, 2000], the judgment of people belonging to other races [Eberhardt, 2005;Freeman et al, 2010;Ito and Bartholow, 2009;Lieberman et al, 2005;Richeson et al, 2003], prejudice [Beer et al, 2008], the evaluation of very poor and ''disgusting'' outgroups such as addicts and beggars in dirty clothes [Harris and Fiske, 2006], and the general evaluation of ingroup-outgroup interactions [Mathur et al, 2010;Van Bavel et al, 2008] but none of the individuals in these studies had to make costly punishment decisions that involved real costs and benefits for themselves or for others. In these studies there was thus no trade off between the individual punisher's self-interest, which suggests that he should not punish at all, and the punisher's altruistic concerns, which suggest that he should protect the victim of norm violations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The mentalizing network orchestrates the impact of parochial altruism on social norm enforcement

Baumgärtner

Götte

Gugler

et al. 2011

Human Brain Mapping

147

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parochial altruism-a preference for altruistic behavior towards ingroup members and mistrust or hostility towards outgroup members-is a pervasive feature in human society and strongly shapes the enforcement of social norms. Since the uniqueness of human society critically depends on the enforcement of norms, the understanding of the neural circuitry of the impact of parochial altruism on social norm enforcement is key, but unexplored. To fill this gap, we measured brain activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) while subjects had the opportunity to punish ingroup members and outgroup members for violating social norms. Findings revealed that subjects' strong punishment of defecting outgroup members is associated with increased activity in a functionally connected network involved in sanction-related decisions (right orbitofrontal gyrus, right lateral prefrontal cortex, right dorsal caudatus). Moreover, the stronger the connectivity in this network, the more outgroup members are punished. In contrast, the much weaker punishment of ingroup members who committed the very same norm violation is associated with increased activity and connectivity in the mentalizing-network (dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, bilateral temporo-parietal junction), as if subjects tried to understand or justify ingroup members' behavior. Finally, connectivity analyses between the two networks suggest that the mentalizing-network modulates punishment by affecting the activity in the right orbitofrontal gyrus and right lateral prefrontal cortex, notably in the same areas showing enhanced activity and connectivity whenever third-parties strongly punished defecting outgroup members.

show abstract

Differential responses in the fusiform region to same-race and other-race faces

Cited by 422 publications

References 46 publications

Autism and the development of face processing

Autism and the development of face processing

Facial Similarity between Voters and Candidates Causes Influence

The mentalizing network orchestrates the impact of parochial altruism on social norm enforcement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About