Do I Have My Attention? Speed of Processing Advantages for the Self-Face Are Not Driven by Automatic Attention Capture

Abstract

We respond more quickly to our own face than to other faces, but there is debate over whether this is connected to attention-grabbing properties of the self-face. In two experiments, we investigate whether the self-face selectively captures attention, and the attentional conditions under which this might occur. In both experiments, we examined whether different types of face (self, friend, stranger) provide differential levels of distraction when processing self, friend and stranger names. In Experiment 1, an image of a distractor face appeared centrally – inside the focus of attention – behind a target name, with the faces either upright or inverted. In Experiment 2, distractor faces appeared peripherally – outside the focus of attention – in the left or right visual field, or bilaterally. In both experiments, self-name recognition was faster than other name recognition, suggesting a self-referential processing advantage. The presence of the self-face did not cause more distraction in the naming task compared to other types of face, either when presented inside (Experiment 1) or outside (Experiment 2) the focus of attention. Distractor faces had different effects across the two experiments: when presented inside the focus of attention (Experiment 1), self and friend images facilitated self and friend naming, respectively. This was not true for stranger stimuli, suggesting that faces must be robustly represented to facilitate name recognition. When presented outside the focus of attention (Experiment 2), no facilitation occurred. Instead, we report an interesting distraction effect caused by friend faces when processing strangers’ names. We interpret this as a “social importance” effect, whereby we may be tuned to pick out and pay attention to familiar friend faces in a crowd. We conclude that any speed of processing advantages observed in the self-face processing literature are not driven by automatic attention capture.

Faces are special, but facial expressions aren’t: Insights from an oculomotor capture paradigm

“…In support of this view, there is no strong evidence that information related to identity, race, or gender (which are partly dependent on mid and high spatial frequencies; Smith, Volna, & Ewing, 2016;Vuilleumier, Armony, Driver, & Dolan, 2003) specifically draws attention to the location of a face. Although it seems possible to identify faces with minimal levels of attention (Reddy, Reddy, & Koch, 2006), neither one's own face nor other personally familiar faces captures attention in a bottom-up fashion (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Laloyaux, Feyers, Theeuwes, & Brédart, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014;Laarni et al, 2000;Qian, Gao, & Wang, 2015). While familiar faces can clearly bias attention, they do so by delaying disengagement once the face has been attended (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Van der Stigchel, Brédart, & Theeuwes, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014).…”

“…Although it seems possible to identify faces with minimal levels of attention (Reddy, Reddy, & Koch, 2006), neither one's own face nor other personally familiar faces captures attention in a bottom-up fashion (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Laloyaux, Feyers, Theeuwes, & Brédart, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014;Laarni et al, 2000;Qian, Gao, & Wang, 2015). While familiar faces can clearly bias attention, they do so by delaying disengagement once the face has been attended (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Van der Stigchel, Brédart, & Theeuwes, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014). Face identification may require additional processing that engages attention after detection (Or & Wilson, 2010).…”

Attention allocation towards own face is pronounced during middle adolescence: an eye‐tracking study

“…This null finding indicates that the developmental trend observed in the present study deals primarily with sustained engagement of attention by faces rather than efficiency of attention orientation towards facial stimuli (Devue et al ., ). This conclusion is consistent with most previous behavioral studies, which failed to show enhanced attentional capture by one's own face compared with familiar others’ faces (Devue et al ., , ; Keyes & Dlugokencka, ). These findings, and the potency of the other types of self‐relevant visual information (such as own name) to capture visuospatial attention (Shapiro et al ., ), suggest a category specificity in the attentional effect of self‐related information (for a similar discussion, Keyes & Dlugokencka, ).…”

Faces are special, but facial expressions aren’t: Insights from an oculomotor capture paradigm

“…In support of this view, there is no strong evidence that information related to identity, race, or gender (which are partly dependent on mid and high spatial frequencies; Smith, Volna, & Ewing, 2016;Vuilleumier, Armony, Driver, & Dolan, 2003) specifically draws attention to the location of a face. Although it seems possible to identify faces with minimal levels of attention (Reddy, Reddy, & Koch, 2006), neither one's own face nor other personally familiar faces capture attention in a bottomup fashion (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Laloyaux, Feyers, Theeuwes, & Brédart, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014;Laarni, Koljonen, Kuistio, Kyrolainen, Lempiainen, & Lepisto, 2000;Qian, Gao, & Wang, 2015). While familiar faces can clearly bias attention, they do so by delaying disengagement once the face has been attended (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Van der Stigchel, Brédart, & Theeuwes, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014).…”

“…Although it seems possible to identify faces with minimal levels of attention (Reddy, Reddy, & Koch, 2006), neither one's own face nor other personally familiar faces capture attention in a bottomup fashion (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Laloyaux, Feyers, Theeuwes, & Brédart, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014;Laarni, Koljonen, Kuistio, Kyrolainen, Lempiainen, & Lepisto, 2000;Qian, Gao, & Wang, 2015). While familiar faces can clearly bias attention, they do so by delaying disengagement once the face has been attended (Devue & Brédart, 2008;Devue, Van der Stigchel, Brédart, & Theeuwes, 2009;Keyes & Dlugokencka, 2014). Face identification may require additional processing that engages attention after detection (Or & Wilson, 2010).…”