Impaired attentional bias toward one's own face in autism spectrum disorder: <scp>ERP</scp> evidence

Cygan, Hanna B.; Nowicka, Maria; Nowicka, Anna

doi:10.1002/aur.2647

Cited by 7 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such an effect was also repeatedly found for one’s own face when compared to a close-other’s face, if—similarly to the present study—the close-other was freely selected by participants as their most significant person ( Cygan et al. 2014 ; Kotlewska and Nowicka 2015 ; Cygan et al. 2021 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The self and a close-other: differences between processing of faces and newly acquired information

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prioritization of self-related information (e.g. self-face) may be driven by its extreme familiarity. Nevertheless, the findings of numerous behavioral studies reported a self-preference for initially unfamiliar information, arbitrarily associated with the self. In the current study, we investigated the neural underpinnings of extremely familiar stimuli (self-face, close-other’s face) and stimuli newly assigned to one’s own person and to a close-other (abstract shapes). Control conditions consisted of unknown faces and unknown abstract shapes. Reaction times (RTs) to the self-face were shorter than to close-other’s and unknown faces, whereas no RTs differences were observed for shapes. P3 amplitude to the self-face was larger than to close-other’s and unknown faces. Nonparametric cluster-based permutation tests showed significant clusters for the self-face vs. other (close-other’s, unknown) faces. However, in the case of shapes P3 amplitudes to the self-assigned shape and to the shape assigned to a close-other were similar, and both were larger than P3 to unknown shapes. No cluster was detected for the self-assigned shape when compared with the shape assigned to the close-other. Thus, our findings revealed preferential attentional processing of the self-face and the similar allocation of attentional resources to shapes assigned to the self and a close-other.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…2017 ) and late ERP components, especially P3—a positive ERP component with centro-parietal distribution and latency of 300 ms or longer ( Cygan et al. 2014 ; Kotlewska and Nowicka 2015 ; Cygan et al. 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The self and a close-other: differences between processing of faces and newly acquired information

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, to ensure control over gender-related effects, the gender of close-other faces has to be matched with that of the participant. This selection approach has been consistent with earlier studies (e.g., Tacikowski et al, 2011Tacikowski et al, , 2013Cygan et al, 2014;Nowicka, 2015, 2016;Kotlewska et al, 2017;Nijhof et al, 2018;Cygan et al, 2022;Żochowska et al, 2022Amodeo et al, 2023). Among the participants, 23 individuals opted for a friend, 9 for their sibling, and 3 for their partner as their chosen close-other.…”

Section: Stimulisupporting

confidence: 80%

How far can the self be extended? Automatic attention capture is triggered not only by the self-face

Żochowska,

Wójcik,

Nowicka

2023

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The preferential processing of self-related information is thought to be driven by its high level of familiarity. However, some behavioral studies have shown that people may exhibit a preference for initially unfamiliar stimuli that have been associated with themselves arbitrarily. One of the key questions that needs to be addressed concerns the role of early attention in the prioritization of newly acquired information associated with the self. Another question is whether both highly familiar as well as new information referring to a subjectively significant person (i.e. close-other) benefits from preferential attentional processing. We aimed to tackle both questions by investigating the neural mechanisms involved in processing extremely familiar stimuli, like one’s own face or the face of a close-other, as well as stimuli (abstract shapes) that were newly linked to each person. We used a dot-probe paradigm that allowed us to investigate the early stages of attentional prioritization. Our analysis of the N2pc component unveiled that attention was automatically captured by the self-face, a shape associated with oneself, and the face of the close person. However, a shape associated with the close-other did not elicit the same attentional response, as the N2pc was absent. Thus, both the self-face and information referring to the extended self (self-assigned shape, close-other’s face) benefit from preferential early and automatic attentional processing.

show abstract

“…As humans are the subject of their own cognition, they are in the unique position of possessing years of detailed motor and sensory-feedback experiences about themselves which result in a highly-elaborated (not only visual but also multimodal) representation of the self-face 7 . Self-face recognition has been shown to be impaired in a variety of neurological or developmental disorders such as autism 8 – 10 and schizophrenia 11 – 13 . In children suffering from autistic-spectrum disorders, mirror self-recognition is developmentally delayed and, in some cases, even absent 14 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, some studies showed that initial indications of self-face discrimination, distinguishing between one’s own face and others, occur outside visual areas. This is manifested by a reduction in midfrontal N2 for one’s own face 39 , 40 , 49 , 51 – 53 or as an increase of P3 in central-parietal areas 9 , 10 , 41 , 45 , 49 , 50 , 53 – 56 . An increase of the midfrontal N2 often signifies a more pronounced involvement of certain forms of executive control 57 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subjectively salient faces differ from emotional faces: ERP evidence

Żochowska,

Nowicka

2024

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The self-face is processed differently than emotional faces. A question arises whether other highly familiar and subjectively significant non-self faces (e.g. partner’s face) are also differentiated from emotional faces. The aim of this event-related potential (ERP) study was to investigate the neural correlates of personally-relevant faces (the self and a close-other’s) as well as emotionally positive (happy) and neutral faces. Participants were tasked with the simple detection of faces. Amplitudes of N170 were more negative in the right than in the left hemisphere and were not modulated by type of face. A similar pattern of N2 and P3 results for the self-face and close-other’s face was observed: they were associated with decreased N2 and increased P3 relative to happy and neutral faces. However, the self-face was preferentially processed also when compared to a close-other’s face as revealed by lower N2 and higher P3 amplitudes. Nonparametric cluster-based permutation tests showed an analogous pattern of results: significant clusters for the self-face compared with all other faces (close-other’s, happy, neutral) and for close-other’s face compared to happy and neutral faces. In summary, the self-face prioritization was observed, as indicated by significant differences between one’s own face and all other faces. Crucially, both types of personally-relevant faces differed from happy faces. These findings point to the pivotal role of subjective evaluation of the saliency factor.

show abstract

Impaired attentional bias toward one's own face in autism spectrum disorder: ERP evidence

Cited by 7 publications

References 55 publications

The self and a close-other: differences between processing of faces and newly acquired information

The self and a close-other: differences between processing of faces and newly acquired information

How far can the self be extended? Automatic attention capture is triggered not only by the self-face

Subjectively salient faces differ from emotional faces: ERP evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About