Recognition memory in developmental prosopagnosia: electrophysiological evidence for abnormal routes to face recognition

Abstract

Dual process models of recognition memory propose two distinct routes for recognizing a face: recollection and familiarity. Recollection is characterized by the remembering of some contextual detail from a previous encounter with a face whereas familiarity is the feeling of finding a face familiar without any contextual details. The Remember/Know (R/K) paradigm is thought to index the relative contributions of recollection and familiarity to recognition performance. Despite researchers measuring face recognition deficits in developmental prosopagnosia (DP) through a variety of methods, none have considered the distinct contributions of recollection and familiarity to recognition performance. The present study examined recognition memory for faces in eight individuals with DP and a group of controls using an R/K paradigm while recording electroencephalogram (EEG) data at the scalp. Those with DP were found to produce fewer correct “remember” responses and more false alarms than controls. EEG results showed that posterior “remember” old/new effects were delayed and restricted to the right posterior (RP) area in those with DP in comparison to the controls. A posterior “know” old/new effect commonly associated with familiarity for faces was only present in the controls whereas individuals with DP exhibited a frontal “know” old/new effect commonly associated with words, objects and pictures. These results suggest that individuals with DP do not utilize normal face-specific routes when making face recognition judgments but instead process faces using a pathway more commonly associated with objects.

Dynamics of brain activity reveal a unitary recognition signal

“…Points below the ERPs indicate time points where the R vs. CR, the U vs. CR, and the R vs. U contrasts were significant which each contrast limiting the family-wise error rate across all electrodes and time points to 5% using a permutation test. periments (Burns, Tree, & Weidemann, 2014;Danker et al, 2008). Consistent with the traditional interpretation of recognition ERPs as reflecting an early familiarity signal and a late recollection signal (Wilding & Ranganath, 2012), ERPs at both time intervals distinguished hits from CRs and the topography of these contrasts differed across these intervals (Figure 2A).…”

Impaired processing of facial happiness, with or without awareness, in developmental prosopagnosia

“…Table 1 shows that only two cases were abnormal on the CFPT. Keeping in line with previous DP research (Bate et al, 2014;Burns et al, 2014), however, our criteria for identifying DP cases required impairment on both the CFMT and FFT.…”

The Definition and Diagnosis of Developmental Prosopagnosia

“…Alternatively, if actual differences in processing strategy or biological markers of DP and super-recognition are observed, this would be stronger evidence that the two terms refer to qualitatively different groups of people. There is some evidence to support this in individuals with DP, given recent neurological findings that suggest structural atypicalities within critical regions implicated in face-processing (e.g., Behrmann, Avidan, Gao, & Black, 2007;Burns, Tree, & Weidemann, 2014;Garrido et al, 2009;Song et al, 2015).…”