Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?

We argue that the current literature on prosopagnosia fails to demonstrate unequivocal evidence for a disproportionate impairment for faces as compared to nonface objects. Two prosopagnosic subjects were tested for the discrimination of objects from several categories (face as well as nonface) at di...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of cognitive neuroscience 1999-07, Vol.11 (4), p.349-370
Hauptverfasser: Gauthier, Isabel, Behrmann, Marlene, Tarr, Michael J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 370
container_issue 4
container_start_page 349
container_title Journal of cognitive neuroscience
container_volume 11
creator Gauthier, Isabel
Behrmann, Marlene
Tarr, Michael J.
description We argue that the current literature on prosopagnosia fails to demonstrate unequivocal evidence for a disproportionate impairment for faces as compared to nonface objects. Two prosopagnosic subjects were tested for the discrimination of objects from several categories (face as well as nonface) at different levels of categorization (basic, subordinate, and exemplar levels). Several dependent measures were obtained including accuracy, signal detection measures, and response times. The results from Experiments 1 to 4 demonstrate that, in simultaneous-matching tasks, response times may reveal impairments with nonface objects in subjects whose error rates only indicate a face deficit. The results from Experiments 5 and 6 show that, given limited stimulus presentation times for face and nonface objects, the same subjects may demonstrate a deªcit for both stimulus categories in sensitivity. In Experiments 7, 8 and 9, a match-to-sample task that places greater demands on memory led to comparable recognition sensitivity with both face and nonface objects. Regardless of object category, the prosopagnosic subjects were more affected by manipulations of the level of categorization than normal controls. This result raises questions regarding neuropsychological evidence for the modularity of face recognition, as well as its theoretical and methodological foundations.
doi_str_mv 10.1162/089892999563472
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70010519</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A55844533</galeid><sourcerecordid>A55844533</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-53b07e1090d683b9bc7f7653ba5aa0d16a18074f8a1d5385485b6c3b309a590f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUFr3DAQhUVoSbZJz7kFk0MvrZuRJdnSKQS3aQuBQGihNyHL40WLLW0kbyH99dWygS7pFiFGvPnmoeERck7hI6V1dQVSSVUppUTNeFMdkQUVDEqZ5Vdkse2Wuf3zhLxJaQUAlaj5MTmhwBsquViQtjW-uDUWiwe0Yend7ILPbzOOT0WHxSeXUrDOzNgXQwxTcd-t0M779PUZeT2YMeHb53pKftx-_t5-Le_uv3xrb-5KK6icS8E6aJCCgr6WrFOdbYamzqoRxkBPa0MlNHyQhvaCScGl6GrLOgbKCAUDOyXvdr7rGB43mGY9uWRxHI3HsEm6AaAgqMrg5QtwFTbR57_pqmLQ5At_oaUZUTs_hDkau3XUN0JIzgVjGfpwAFqix2jG4HFwWd7HywN4Pj1Ozh7ir3a8jSGliINeRzeZ-KQp6G3A-kXAeeLiebVNN2G_x-8SzcD7HTC5vbX_b9ceoFfB-l-UOq4ZVFSArnLJBnlc_3brf1z-AFFMvIg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>223072300</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>MIT Press</source><creator>Gauthier, Isabel ; Behrmann, Marlene ; Tarr, Michael J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Isabel ; Behrmann, Marlene ; Tarr, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><description>We argue that the current literature on prosopagnosia fails to demonstrate unequivocal evidence for a disproportionate impairment for faces as compared to nonface objects. Two prosopagnosic subjects were tested for the discrimination of objects from several categories (face as well as nonface) at different levels of categorization (basic, subordinate, and exemplar levels). Several dependent measures were obtained including accuracy, signal detection measures, and response times. The results from Experiments 1 to 4 demonstrate that, in simultaneous-matching tasks, response times may reveal impairments with nonface objects in subjects whose error rates only indicate a face deficit. The results from Experiments 5 and 6 show that, given limited stimulus presentation times for face and nonface objects, the same subjects may demonstrate a deªcit for both stimulus categories in sensitivity. In Experiments 7, 8 and 9, a match-to-sample task that places greater demands on memory led to comparable recognition sensitivity with both face and nonface objects. Regardless of object category, the prosopagnosic subjects were more affected by manipulations of the level of categorization than normal controls. This result raises questions regarding neuropsychological evidence for the modularity of face recognition, as well as its theoretical and methodological foundations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0898-929X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1530-8898</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1162/089892999563472</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10471845</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>One Rogers Street, Cambridge, MA 02142-1209, USA: MIT Press</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Agnosia ; Agnosia - physiopathology ; Agnosia - psychology ; Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Decision Making ; Face ; Female ; Form Perception ; Humans ; Male ; Memory ; Pattern Recognition, Visual ; Psychological aspects ; Reaction Time ; Recognition (Psychology) ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Space Perception</subject><ispartof>Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 1999-07, Vol.11 (4), p.349-370</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 1999 MIT Press Journals</rights><rights>Copyright MIT Press Journals Jul 1999</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-53b07e1090d683b9bc7f7653ba5aa0d16a18074f8a1d5385485b6c3b309a590f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-53b07e1090d683b9bc7f7653ba5aa0d16a18074f8a1d5385485b6c3b309a590f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://direct.mit.edu/jocn/article/doi/10.1162/089892999563472$$EHTML$$P50$$Gmit$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,53984,53985</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10471845$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Isabel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Behrmann, Marlene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tarr, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><title>Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?</title><title>Journal of cognitive neuroscience</title><addtitle>J Cogn Neurosci</addtitle><description>We argue that the current literature on prosopagnosia fails to demonstrate unequivocal evidence for a disproportionate impairment for faces as compared to nonface objects. Two prosopagnosic subjects were tested for the discrimination of objects from several categories (face as well as nonface) at different levels of categorization (basic, subordinate, and exemplar levels). Several dependent measures were obtained including accuracy, signal detection measures, and response times. The results from Experiments 1 to 4 demonstrate that, in simultaneous-matching tasks, response times may reveal impairments with nonface objects in subjects whose error rates only indicate a face deficit. The results from Experiments 5 and 6 show that, given limited stimulus presentation times for face and nonface objects, the same subjects may demonstrate a deªcit for both stimulus categories in sensitivity. In Experiments 7, 8 and 9, a match-to-sample task that places greater demands on memory led to comparable recognition sensitivity with both face and nonface objects. Regardless of object category, the prosopagnosic subjects were more affected by manipulations of the level of categorization than normal controls. This result raises questions regarding neuropsychological evidence for the modularity of face recognition, as well as its theoretical and methodological foundations.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Agnosia</subject><subject>Agnosia - physiopathology</subject><subject>Agnosia - psychology</subject><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Face</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Form Perception</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Pattern Recognition, Visual</subject><subject>Psychological aspects</subject><subject>Reaction Time</subject><subject>Recognition (Psychology)</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Space Perception</subject><issn>0898-929X</issn><issn>1530-8898</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUFr3DAQhUVoSbZJz7kFk0MvrZuRJdnSKQS3aQuBQGihNyHL40WLLW0kbyH99dWygS7pFiFGvPnmoeERck7hI6V1dQVSSVUppUTNeFMdkQUVDEqZ5Vdkse2Wuf3zhLxJaQUAlaj5MTmhwBsquViQtjW-uDUWiwe0Yend7ILPbzOOT0WHxSeXUrDOzNgXQwxTcd-t0M779PUZeT2YMeHb53pKftx-_t5-Le_uv3xrb-5KK6icS8E6aJCCgr6WrFOdbYamzqoRxkBPa0MlNHyQhvaCScGl6GrLOgbKCAUDOyXvdr7rGB43mGY9uWRxHI3HsEm6AaAgqMrg5QtwFTbR57_pqmLQ5At_oaUZUTs_hDkau3XUN0JIzgVjGfpwAFqix2jG4HFwWd7HywN4Pj1Ozh7ir3a8jSGliINeRzeZ-KQp6G3A-kXAeeLiebVNN2G_x-8SzcD7HTC5vbX_b9ceoFfB-l-UOq4ZVFSArnLJBnlc_3brf1z-AFFMvIg</recordid><startdate>19990701</startdate><enddate>19990701</enddate><creator>Gauthier, Isabel</creator><creator>Behrmann, Marlene</creator><creator>Tarr, Michael J.</creator><general>MIT Press</general><general>MIT Press Journals</general><general>MIT Press Journals, The</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19990701</creationdate><title>Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?</title><author>Gauthier, Isabel ; Behrmann, Marlene ; Tarr, Michael J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c518t-53b07e1090d683b9bc7f7653ba5aa0d16a18074f8a1d5385485b6c3b309a590f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Agnosia</topic><topic>Agnosia - physiopathology</topic><topic>Agnosia - psychology</topic><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Face</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Form Perception</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Pattern Recognition, Visual</topic><topic>Psychological aspects</topic><topic>Reaction Time</topic><topic>Recognition (Psychology)</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Space Perception</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gauthier, Isabel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Behrmann, Marlene</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tarr, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of cognitive neuroscience</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gauthier, Isabel</au><au>Behrmann, Marlene</au><au>Tarr, Michael J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cognitive neuroscience</jtitle><addtitle>J Cogn Neurosci</addtitle><date>1999-07-01</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>349</spage><epage>370</epage><pages>349-370</pages><issn>0898-929X</issn><eissn>1530-8898</eissn><abstract>We argue that the current literature on prosopagnosia fails to demonstrate unequivocal evidence for a disproportionate impairment for faces as compared to nonface objects. Two prosopagnosic subjects were tested for the discrimination of objects from several categories (face as well as nonface) at different levels of categorization (basic, subordinate, and exemplar levels). Several dependent measures were obtained including accuracy, signal detection measures, and response times. The results from Experiments 1 to 4 demonstrate that, in simultaneous-matching tasks, response times may reveal impairments with nonface objects in subjects whose error rates only indicate a face deficit. The results from Experiments 5 and 6 show that, given limited stimulus presentation times for face and nonface objects, the same subjects may demonstrate a deªcit for both stimulus categories in sensitivity. In Experiments 7, 8 and 9, a match-to-sample task that places greater demands on memory led to comparable recognition sensitivity with both face and nonface objects. Regardless of object category, the prosopagnosic subjects were more affected by manipulations of the level of categorization than normal controls. This result raises questions regarding neuropsychological evidence for the modularity of face recognition, as well as its theoretical and methodological foundations.</abstract><cop>One Rogers Street, Cambridge, MA 02142-1209, USA</cop><pub>MIT Press</pub><pmid>10471845</pmid><doi>10.1162/089892999563472</doi><tpages>22</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0898-929X
ispartof Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 1999-07, Vol.11 (4), p.349-370
issn 0898-929X
1530-8898
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70010519
source MEDLINE; MIT Press
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Agnosia
Agnosia - physiopathology
Agnosia - psychology
Cognition & reasoning
Decision Making
Face
Female
Form Perception
Humans
Male
Memory
Pattern Recognition, Visual
Psychological aspects
Reaction Time
Recognition (Psychology)
Sensitivity and Specificity
Space Perception
title Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T06%3A53%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Can%20Face%20Recognition%20Really%20be%20Dissociated%20from%20Object%20Recognition?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cognitive%20neuroscience&rft.au=Gauthier,%20Isabel&rft.date=1999-07-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=349&rft.epage=370&rft.pages=349-370&rft.issn=0898-929X&rft.eissn=1530-8898&rft_id=info:doi/10.1162/089892999563472&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA55844533%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=223072300&rft_id=info:pmid/10471845&rft_galeid=A55844533&rfr_iscdi=true