Prosopagnosia: a double dissociation between the recognition of familiar and unfamiliar faces.

Malone, Daniel R.; Morris, Harold H.; Kay, Marilyn; Levin, Harvey S.

doi:10.1136/jnnp.45.9.820

Cited by 159 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of findings consistent with the view of a dissociation between deficits of recognition of familiar and unfamiliar faces were subsequently obtained (see Benton, 1980). The strongest evidence comes from the tu o single case studies of prosopagnosic patients presented by Malone et al (1982) who described one patient whose ability to match unfamiliar faces recovered whilst the severe recognition deficit for familiar faces persisted, and a second patient whose Neuropsychological evidence is also consistent with our model (see also H. Ellis, in press b) Understanding face recognition 3 15 ability to recognize familiar people recovered whilst problems in matching unfamiliar faces persisted. Such dissociations would be expected from our model in which the recognition units and person identity nodes used in identifying faces that are already familiar form a route quite distinct from that used to temporarily store and recognize unfamiliar faces.…”

Section: Vicki Bruce and Andy Youngmentioning

confidence: 67%

Understanding face recognition

Bruce

Young

1986

British J of Psychology

3,455

209

2,894

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to develop a theoretical model and a set of terms for understanding and discussing how we recognize familiar faces, and the relationship between recognition and other aspects of face processing. It is suggested that there are seven distinct types of information that we derive from seen faces; these are labelled pictorial, structural, visually derived semantic, identity-specific semantic, name, expression and facial speech codes. A functional model is proposed in which structural encoding processes provide descriptions suitable for the analysis of facial speech, for analysis of expression and for face recognition units. Recognition of familiar faces involves a match between the products of structural encoding and previously stored structural codes describing the appearance of familiar faces, held in face recognition units. Identity-specific semantic codes are then accessed from person identity nodes, and subsequently name codes are retrieved. It is also proposed that the cognitive system plays an active role in deciding whether or not the initial match is sufficiently close to indicate true recognition or merely a 'resemblance'; several factors are seen as influencing such decisions.This functional model is used to draw together data from diverse sources including laboratory experiments, studies of everyday errors, and studies of patients with different types of cerebral injury. It is also used to clarify similarities and differences between processes responsible for object, word and face recognition.A human face reveals a great deal of information to a perceiver. It can tell about mood and intention and attentiveness, but it can also serve to identify a person. Of course, a person can be identified by other means than the face. Voice, body shape, gait or even clothing may all establish identity in circumstances where facial detail may not be available. Nevertheless, a face is the most distinctive and widely used key to a person's identity, and the loss of ability to recognize faces experienced by some neurological (prosopagnosic) patients has a profound effect on their lives. bibliography compiled by Baron (1979) lists over 200. However, as H. Ellis (1975 pointed out, this considerable empirical activity was not initially accompanied by developments in theoretical understanding of the processes underlying face recognition. It is only comparatively recently that serious theoretical models have been put forward (Bruce, 1979Baron, 1981; H. Ellis, 1981Ellis, , 1983, in press a ; Hay & Young, 1982;Rhodes, 1985; A. Ellis et al., in press).In this paper we present a theoretical framework for face recognition which draws together and extends these recent models. This new framework is used to clarify what we now understand about face recognition, and also to point to where the gaps in our knowledge lie. It is also used to compare and contrast the recognition of people's faces with the recognition of other types of visual stimuli, and to explore ways in which mechanisms involved in human facial re...

show abstract

Section: Vicki Bruce and Andy Youngmentioning

confidence: 67%

Understanding face recognition

Bruce

Young

1986

British J of Psychology

3,455

209

2,894

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2 In 22 of these cases, unfamiliar face recognition was tested only with the BFRT and/or the RMF [4,5,9,12,16,[17][18][19][20]23,28,30,35,36,47,48]. Because we have demonstrated that normal scores on these tests do not require intact unfamiliar face recognition, these cases should no longer be considered support for the dissociation.…”

Section: Implications For Theories Of Normal Face Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An evaluation of two commonly used tests of unfamiliar face recognition

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Warrington Recognition Memory for Faces (RMF) and the Benton Facial Recognition Test (BFRT) are commercially available tests that are commonly used by clinicians and cognitive neuropsychologists to evaluate unfamiliar face recognition. Yet, it is not clear that a normal score on either instrument demonstrates normal unfamiliar face recognition. Because the RMFs stimuli contain abundant non-internal facial feature information, subjects may be able to score in the normal range without using internal facial features. On the BFRT, subjects commonly rely on feature matching strategies using the hairline and eyebrows rather than recognizing the facial configuration. To test whether these routes to recognition can support normal performance, normal subjects were tested with versions of the RMF and the BFRT in which the faces had been painted over in a way that prevented the operation of some of the procedures normally involved with face recognition. Even though these modifications removed all of the internal feature information in the RMF, many subjects scored in the normal range, and despite precluding the use of configural processing in the BFRT, many of the scores were in the normal range. As a result, it is apparent that normal scores on these tests do not demonstrate normal unfamiliar face recognition and so clinicians should be cautious in interpreting scores in the normal range. Finally, these results place in question models supported by dissociations involving normal performance on these tests.

show abstract

“…In many cases, however, the impairment of the prosopagnostic patients was confined to the identification of faces (i.e. associating between a face and a person) whereas their ability to distinguish between faces and other visual stimuli and, in some cases, even to match between faces of the same individual seen from different angle, was significantly better or even intact (Benton & Van Allen, 1972;Malone, Morris, Kay, & Levin, 1982) 1 . This pattern led to a further dissociation between a specific visual mechanism responsible for the structural encoding of faces, and a "higher level" mechanism responsible for associating the structural representation of a face with semantic information about the person to whom the face belongs (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural Encoding and Identification in Face Processing: Erp Evidence for Separate Mechanisms

Bentin

Deouell²

2000

Cognitive Neuropsychology

571

458

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study had two aims. The first aim was to explore the possible top-down effect of facerecognition and/or face-identification processes on the formation of structural representation of faces, as indexed by the N170 ERP component. The second aim was to examine possible ERP manifestations of face identification processes as an initial step for assessing their time course and functional neuroanatomy. Identical N170 potentials were elicited by famous and unfamiliar faces in Experiment 1, when both were irrelevant to the task, suggesting that face familiarity does not affect structural encoding processes. Small but significant differences were observed, however, during later-occurring epochs of the ERPs. In Experiment 2 the participants were instructed to count occasionally occurring portraits of famous politicians while rejecting faces of famous people who were not politicians and faces of unfamiliar people. Although an attempt to identify each face was required, no differences were found in the N170 elicited by faces of unfamiliar people and faces of familiar non-politicians. Famous faces, however, elicited a negative potential that was significantly larger than that elicited by unfamiliar faces between about 250 and 500msec from stimulus onset. This negative component was tentatively identified as an N400 analogue elicited by faces. Both the absence of an effect of familiarity on the N170 and the familiarity face-N400 effect were replicated in Experiment 3, in which the participants made speeded button-press responses in each trial, distinguishing among faces of politicians and faces of famous and unfamiliar non-politicians. In addition, ERP components later than the N400 were found to be associated with the speed of the response but not with face familiarity. We concluded that (1) although reflected by the N170, the structural encoding mechanism is not influenced by the face recognition and identification processes, and (2) the negative component modulated by face familiarity is associated with the semantic activity involved in the identification of familiar faces.

show abstract

Prosopagnosia: a double dissociation between the recognition of familiar and unfamiliar faces.

Cited by 159 publications

References 10 publications

Understanding face recognition

Understanding face recognition

An evaluation of two commonly used tests of unfamiliar face recognition

Structural Encoding and Identification in Face Processing: Erp Evidence for Separate Mechanisms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About