My face or yours? Event-related potential correlates of self-face processing

Keyes, Helen; Brady, Nuala; Reilly, Richard B.; Foxe, John J.

doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2009.09.006

Cited by 166 publications

(193 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

152

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Höller et al (2011) reported preferential processing when presenting one's own name aurally, reflected in higher amplitudes of N170. Analogous evidence for visual presentation of one's own name is missing, but similar early effects (at the level of N170) were found for self-face processing (Keyes, Brady, Reilly, & Foxe, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 73%

“…Amplitudes of N250 component, in turn, were larger for both the self-name (Zhao et al, 2009) and for the self-face (Tanaka et al, 2006;Keyes et al, 2010) than to other names and faces, respectively. Self-face processing resulted also resulted in enhanced amplitudes of N400 in comparison to the face of twin (Butler et al, 2013) or a friend's face (Keyes et al, 2010), as well as in comparison to unfamiliar faces.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Present self, past self and close-other: Event-related potential study of face and name detection

Kotlewska

Nowicka

2015

Biological Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of evidence suggests that information regarding the past self and other people is processed similarly. However, there is not much evidence supporting this notion at the neural level. In this event-related potential (ERP) study we examined processing of one's own marital and family name (i.e., present and past self-name, respectively) and images of present and past self-face in comparison to names and faces of others (the close-other, famous and unknown person). Amplitudes of P300 (a late ERP component associated with attention, emotion, and autobiographical memory) to self-face and self-name, either present or past, was enhanced in comparison to famous and unknown faces and names. No differences, however, were observed between the past and present self-names as well as between past and present self-faces. Moreover, P300 amplitude to the past self-face was enhanced in the right hemisphere in comparison to the close-other's face, whereas P300 amplitudes to the past self-name and the close-other's name did not differ. Thus, our results indicated that information related to non-physical aspects of the past self were processed similarly to the close-other.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Present self, past self and close-other: Event-related potential study of face and name detection

Kotlewska

Nowicka

2015

Biological Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A recent ERP study has also shown that the self-face can already be differentiated from other familiar or unfamiliar faces on the N170 component over occipital regions (Keyes, Brady, Reilly, & Foxe, 2010). This early component is supposed to reflect structural encoding of faces.…”

Section: Summary and Functions Of The Self-related Areasmentioning

confidence: 95%

The neural correlates of visual self-recognition

Devue

Brédart

2011

Consciousness and Cognition

160

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a review of studies that were aimed at determining which brain regions are recruited during visual self-recognition, with a particular focus on self-face recognition. A complex bilateral network, involving frontal, parietal and occipital areas, appears to be associated with self-face recognition, with a particularly high implication of the right hemisphere. Results indicate that it remains difficult to determine which specific cognitive operation is reflected by each recruited brain area, in part due to the variability of used control stimuli and experimental tasks. A synthesis of the interpretations provided by previous studies is presented. The relevance of using self-recognition as an indicator of self-awareness is discussed. We argue that a major aim of future research in the field should be to identify more clearly the cognitive operations induced by the perception of the self-face, and search for dissociations between neural correlates and cognitive components.

show abstract

“…People identify their own faces and voices as familiar (Keyes, Brady, Reilly, & Foxe, 2009;Nakamura et al, 2001). Behaviorally, self-face is recognized more quickly and accurately than familiar or nonself faces (Keyes & Brady, 2010), and contemporary listeners discriminate between self, familiar, and other voices with near-ceiling accuracy (Rosa, Lassonde, Pinard, Keenan, & Belin, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can you McGurk yourself? Self-face and self-voice in audiovisual speech

Aruffo

Shore

2011

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are constantly exposed to our own face and voice, and we identify our own faces and voices as familiar. However, the influence of self-identity upon self-speech perception is still uncertain. Speech perception is a synthesis of both auditory and visual inputs; although we hear our own voice when we speak, we rarely see the dynamic movements of our own face. If visual speech and identity are processed independently, no processing advantage would obtain in viewing one's own highly familiar face. In the present experiment, the relative contributions of facial and vocal inputs to speech perception were evaluated with an audiovisual illusion. Our results indicate that auditory self-speech conveys a processing advantage, whereas visual self-speech does not. The data thereby support a model of visual speech as dynamic movement processed separately from speaker recognition.

show abstract

My face or yours? Event-related potential correlates of self-face processing

Cited by 166 publications

References 50 publications

Present self, past self and close-other: Event-related potential study of face and name detection

Present self, past self and close-other: Event-related potential study of face and name detection

The neural correlates of visual self-recognition

Can you McGurk yourself? Self-face and self-voice in audiovisual speech

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About