Exploring the Structure of Multidimensional Face-space: The Effects of Age and Gender

Sex-contingent face after-effects suggest distinct neural populations code male and female faces

“…low level) adaptation. While competing assumptions with regard to the likelihood that distinct neural populations code male and female faces have been advanced in the past ( Johnston et al 1997;Rhodes et al 2003), our findings are the first empirical evidence that separate neural populations (or 'face-spaces') code male and female faces. The sexcontingent after-effects observed in all three of our experiments indicate that contingent after-effects, such as those observed for upright and inverted faces (Rhodes et al 2004), are not restricted to comparisons of categories that differ in the extent to which expertise-derived configural processing occurs, but can also occur for categories of faces for which configural processing is equal.…”

“…Intriguingly, contrasting assumptions about the likelihood that distinct neural populations (or 'face-spaces', Valentine 1991; Leopold et al 2001;Rhodes et al 2003Rhodes et al , 2004) code male and female faces have been advanced, but never tested. Johnston et al (1997) state that, 'A single facespace is assumed to represent both male and female faces. Indeed, it is hard to see what alternative could reasonably be suggested', while Rhodes et al (2003) state that, 'Male and female faces differ structurally, so we assume a distinct face-space for each sex'.…”

Identification of own-race and other-race faces: Implications for the representation of race in face space

“…The multidimensional space (MDS) framework is currently a popular account of how faces are represented (e.g., Bruce, Burton, & Dench, 1994;Byatt & Rhodes, 1998;Johnston, Kanazawa, Kato, & Oda, 1997;Johnston, Milne, & Williams, 1997;Rhodes, Byatt, Tremewan, & Kennedy, 1997;Valentine & Endo, 1992). The core assumption of the framework is that the spatial relationships between representations in a multidimensional feature space (face space) can explain a variety of face perception phenomena.…”

Recognition, Classification and Inversion of Faces in the Multidimensional Space

“…The MDS model, which began as a metaphor for mental representations of faces (Valentine, 1991a), and has been extensively investigated ever since its conceptualization (e.g. Bruce et al, 1994;Burton & Vokey, 1998;Busey, 1998;Byatt & Rhodes, 1998;Johnston, Kanazawa et al, 1997;Lewis & Johnston, 1997, 1999aTanaka et al, 1998;Valentine, 2001;Valentine & Endo, 1992;Wickham et al, 2000), was only recently empirically validated (Catz et al, 2009). Once validated, it was possible to test some of the model's predictions.…”

“…As Levin (1996) pointed out, by changing the estimated weight of different dimensions or the relative density of the theoretical faces, one can explain different phenomena. Thus, although many studies have referred to the MDS metaphoric model (e.g., Bruce et al, 1994;Burton & Vokey, 1998;Busey, 1998;Byatt & Rhodes, 1998;Johnston, Kanazawa, Kato, & Oda, 1997;Lewis & Johnston, 1997, 1999aTanaka et al, 1998;Valentine, Chiroro, & Dixon, 1995;Valentine & Endo, 1992;Wickham et al, 2000), it is necessary to test its predictions on an empirically defined MDS. Recently, an attempt was made (Catz, Kampf, Nachson, & Babkoff, 2009) to construct an operational MDS that included 200 faces which were each rated on 21 dimensions.…”