Getting to know you: How we learn new faces

Previous work has shown an advantage for matching the internal features of familiar faces in contrast to an advantage for the external features of unfamiliar faces. In the current experiment, we tracked this shift towards an internal feature advantage as subjects were familiarized with a set of initially unfamiliar faces. They were asked to learn a set of 24 faces from video images and complete a face matching task on 3 consecutive days. Half of the faces were learned from moving images while the others were learned from static images to determine whether movement was necessary to produce the internal advantage found when matching familiar faces. We found that by the end of the 3 days, performance on the internal features had improved and was equivalent to performance on the external features. In contrast, matching of the external features remained at a relatively constant level across the experiment. Faces were learned equally well from moving and static images suggesting that movement is not necessary to promote learning of the internal features.     

Matching familiar and unfamiliar faces on internal and external features

Two experiments are reported in which subjects were asked to match a photograph of a complete face and a simultaneously presented photograph of internal or external features of a face, deciding whether or not the two photographs were pictures of the same person. In experiment 1 'same' pairs were derived from different pictures of the same face, so that subjects had to match the faces and not the particular photographs used. Matches based on internal features were found to be faster for familiar than for unfamiliar faces, whereas there was no difference in reaction time between matches based on the external features of familiar and unfamiliar faces. Faster matching of internal features of familiar faces was found to hold equally for pairs of photographs that differed in orientation of the face or in facial expression. In experiment 2 'same' pairs were derived from the same photographs, which gave subjects the choice of matching on the basis of the features of the depicted faces or matching the photographs. Reaction times were faster than in experiment 1, and there were no differences between familiar and unfamiliar faces. The study confirms reports of differential saliency of the internal features of familiar faces, and shows that this only holds when stimuli are treated as faces. The finding thus reflects properties of structural rather than pictorial codes.     

The importance of internal facial features in learning new faces

For familiar faces, the internal features (eyes, nose, and mouth) are known to be differentially salient for recognition compared to external features such as hairstyle. Two experiments are reported that investigate how this internal feature advantage accrues as a face becomes familiar. In Experiment 1, we tested the contribution of internal and external features to the ability to generalize from a single studied photograph to different views of the same face. A recognition advantage for the internal features over the external features was found after a change of viewpoint, whereas there was no internal feature advantage when the same image was used at study and test. In Experiment 2, we removed the most salient external feature (hairstyle) from studied photographs and looked at how this affected generalization to a novel viewpoint. Removing the hair from images of the face assisted generalization to novel viewpoints, and this was especially the case when photographs showing more than one viewpoint were studied. The results suggest that the internal features play an important role in the generalization between different images of an individual's face by enabling the viewer to detect the common identity-diagnostic elements across non-identical instances of the face.     

Lateralised processing of the internal and the external facial features of personally familiar and unfamiliar faces: a visual half-field study

In this visual half field (VHF) experiment, we investigated possible differences between the left and the right hemisphere in the processing of the internal and external features of familiar and unfamiliar faces. Previous studies using famous and unknown faces had indicated that both hemispheres use the same qualitative mode of processing with the internal features being more important for the perception of familiar faces. In this experiment, personally familiar faces rather than famous faces are used. There are several, mainly methodological, reasons why personally familiar faces are more appropriate stimuli to investigate face processing. The results of the present study showed that no overall visual field effect occurred, but more importantly, that face processing in the left hemisphere differed qualitatively from that in the right hemisphere. The theoretical repercussions of these findings are discussed.     

An inner face advantage in children's recognition of familiar peers

Children’s recognition of familiar own-age peers was investigated. Chinese children (4-, 8-, and 14-year-olds) were asked to identify their classmates from photographs showing the entire face, the internal facial features only, the external facial features only, or the eyes, nose, or mouth only. Participants from all age groups were familiar with the faces used as stimuli for 1 academic year. The results showed that children from all age groups demonstrated an advantage for recognition of the internal facial features relative to their recognition of the external facial features. Thus, previous observations of a shift in reliance from external to internal facial features can be attributed to experience with faces rather than to age-related changes in face processing.     

熟悉面孔与陌生面孔识别的差异

摘 要：面孔识别包括熟悉面孔识别和陌生面孔识别,两者之间的差异已经得到了多方面的证明。神经生理学的研究发现,识别陌生面孔和熟悉面孔所激活的脑区存在差异,与识别陌生面孔相比,识别熟悉面孔的脑区活动范围更大,包括双侧前额叶、单侧颞叶、海马回、杏仁核、后扣带回和右下额叶。并且也存在脑电的差异,比如 N400和P600的差异。对陌生面孔和熟悉面孔识别具有相同影响的因素有：遮挡、倒置等;具有不同影响的因素有：视角、表情、内外部特征等。文章也探讨了陌生面孔变成熟悉面孔的过程,以及在这一过程中起主要作用的编码形式等。     

Exploring levels of face familiarity by using an indirect face-matching measure

An experiment is reported in which participants matched complete images of unfamiliar, moderately familiar, and highly familiar faces with simultaneously presented images of internal and external features. Participants had to decide if the two images depicted same or different individuals. Matches to internal features were made faster to highly familiar faces than both to moderately familiar and to unfamiliar faces, and matches to moderately familiar faces were made faster than to unfamiliar faces. For external feature matches, this advantage was only found for "different" decision matches to highly familiar faces compared to unfamiliar faces. The results indicate that the differences in familiar and unfamiliar face processing are not the result of all-or-none effects, but seem to have a graded impact on matching performance. These findings extend the earlier work of Young et al (1985 Perception 14 737-746), and we discuss the possibility of using the matching task as an indirect measure of face familiarity.     

Face processing and familiarity: Evidence from eye‐movement data

How is information extracted from familiar and unfamiliar faces? Three experiments, in which eye‐movement measures were used, examined whether there was differential sampling of the internal face region according to familiarity. Experiment 1 used a face familiarity task and found that whilst the majority of fixations fell within the internal region, there were no differences in the sampling of this region according to familiarity. Experiment 2 replicated these findings, using a standard recognition memory paradigm. The third experiment employed a matching task, and once again found that the majority of fixations fell within the internal region. Additionally, this experiment found that there was more sampling of the internal region when faces were familiar compared with when they were unfamiliar. The use of eye fixation measures affirms the importance of internal facial features in the recognition of familiar faces compared with unfamiliar faces, but only when viewers compare pairs of faces.     

7-11-year-old children show an advantage for matching and recognizing the internal features of familiar faces: Evidence against a developmental shift

Adults are better at recognizing familiar faces from the internal facial features (eyes, nose, mouth) than from the external facial features (hair, face outline). However, previous research suggests that this “internal advantage” does not appear until relatively late in childhood, and some studies suggest that children rely on external features to recognize all faces, whether familiar or not. We use a matching task to examine face processing in 7-8- and 10-11-year-old children. We use a design in which all face stimuli can be used as familiar items (for participants who are classmates) and unfamiliar items (for participants from a different school). Using this design, we find an internal feature advantage for matching familiar faces, for both groups of children. The same children were then shown the external and internal features of their classmates and were asked to name or otherwise identify them. Again, both age groups identified more of their classmates correctly from the internal than the external features. This is the first time an internal advantage has been reported in this age group. Results suggest that children as young as 7 process faces in the same way as do adults, and that once procedural difficulties are overcome, the standard effects of familiarity are observed.     

The relative importance of external and internal features of facial composites

Three experiments are reported that compare the quality of external with internal regions within a set of facial composites using two matching‐type tasks. Composites are constructed with the aim of triggering recognition from people familiar with the targets, and past research suggests internal face features dominate representations of familiar faces in memory. However the experiments reported here show that the internal regions of composites are very poorly matched against the faces they purport to represent, while external feature regions alone were matched almost as well as complete composites. In Experiments 1 and 2 the composites used were constructed by participant‐witnesses who were unfamiliar with the targets and therefore were predicted to demonstrate a bias towards the external parts of a face. In Experiment 3 we compared witnesses who were familiar or unfamiliar with the target items, but for both groups the external features were much better reproduced in the composites, suggesting it is the process of composite construction itself which is responsible for the poverty of the internal features. Practical implications of these results are discussed.     

The inversion effect in infancy: the role of internal and external features

The present work examined the changing role of inner and outer facial features in the recognition of upright and inverted faces in 5-, 7-, and 9-month-olds. Study 1 established that the “inversion effect” (impaired recognition of an inverted face) was present in infants as young as 5 months. In Study 2, internal and external features were inverted separately. Disrupting the internal configuration by inversion impaired recognition at all ages; disrupting the external configuration impaired recognition only at 5-months. In Study 3, an upright familiar face was paired with one having either novel internal or novel external features. The results confirmed that the 5-month-olds used only the external features to recognize faces, whereas older infants were as adept at using internal features as external ones. These findings suggest a shift, after 5 months, away from dependence on external features for face recognition and toward greater reliance on internal ones.     

Sensitivity to feature displacement in familiar and unfamiliar faces: beyond the internal/external feature distinction

Previous studies of face recognition and of face matching have shown a general improvement for the processing of internal features as a face becomes more familiar to the participant. In this study, we used a psychophysical two-alternative forced-choice paradigm to investigate thresholds for the detection of a displacement of the eyes, nose, mouth, or ears for familiar and unfamiliar faces. No clear division between internal and external features was observed. Rather, for familiar (compared to unfamiliar) faces participants were more sensitive to displacements of internal features such as the eyes or the nose; yet, for our third internal feature-the mouth no such difference was observed. Despite large displacements, many subjects were unable to perform above chance when stimuli involved shifts in the position of the ears. These results are consistent with the proposal that familiarity effects may be mediated by the construction of a robust representation of a face, although the involvement of attention in the encoding of face stimuli cannot be ruled out. Furthermore, these effects are mediated by information from a spatial configuration of features, rather than by purely feature-based information.     

The Headscarf Effect: Direct Evidence from the Eyewitness Identification Paradigm

Internal and external features dominate familiar and unfamiliar face recognition, respectively. However, this finding is not universal; Egyptians showed a robust internal‐feature advantage for processing unfamiliar faces (Megreya & Bindemann, 2009). This bias was speculatively attributed to their long‐term experiences for individuating female faces with headscarves, which completely cover the external features. Here, we provided an empirical test for this suggestion. Participants from Egypt and UK were presented with a staged crime, which was committed by an own‐race woman with or without a headscarf. All participants were then asked to identify the culprit from a line‐up involving 10 faces with or without headscarves. British participants showed an advantage when the culprit left her hair uncovered. In contrast, Egyptian observers showed an advantage when the culprit wore a headscarf. This Egyptian headscarf effect was also replicated using British faces, suggesting that it reflects a specific characteristic of participant nationality rather than face nationality. These results therefore provide evidence for how culture influences cognition. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Why are moving faces easier to recognize?

Previous work has suggested that seeing a famous face move aids the recognition of identity, especially when viewing conditions are degraded (Knight & Johnston, ; Lander, Christie, & Bruce, ). Experiment 1 investigated whether the beneficial effects of motion are related to a particular type of facial motion (expressing, talking, or rigid motion). Results showed a significant beneficial effect of both expressive and talking movements, but no advantage for rigid motion, compared with a single static image. Experiment 2 investigated whether the advantage for motion is uniform across identity. Participants rated moving famous faces for distinctiveness of motion. The famous faces (moving and static freeze frame) were then used as stimuli in a recognition task. The advantage for face motion was significant only when the motion displayed was distinctive. Results suggest that a reason why moving faces are easier to recognize is because some familiar faces have characteristic motion patterns, which act as an additional cue to identity.     

Tolerance for distorted faces: Challenges to a configural processing account of familiar face recognition

Face recognition is widely held to rely on ‘configural processing’, an analysis of spatial relations between facial features. We present three experiments in which viewers were shown distorted faces, and asked to resize these to their correct shape. Based on configural theories appealing to metric distances between features, we reason that this should be an easier task for familiar than unfamiliar faces (whose subtle arrangements of features are unknown). In fact, participants were inaccurate at this task, making between 8% and 13% errors across experiments. Importantly, we observed no advantage for familiar faces: in one experiment participants were more accurate with unfamiliars, and in two experiments there was no difference. These findings were not due to general task difficulty – participants were able to resize blocks of colour to target shapes (squares) more accurately. We also found an advantage of familiarity for resizing other stimuli (brand logos). If configural processing does underlie face recognition, these results place constraints on the definition of ‘configural’. Alternatively, familiar face recognition might rely on more complex criteria – based on tolerance to within-person variation rather than highly specific measurement.     

What do children look at in an adult face with which they are personally familiar?

Adults recognize familiar faces better by their internal than external face parts. It is not clear when children achieve this internal face part advantage, however, previous research has suggested that it emerges after the age of seven years. The present study was the first study to show personally familiar adult faces (school staff) to children aged 5–6, 7–8 and 10–11 years, and we asked the children to identify which faces were familiar. An internal face part advantage was found at all ages.     

Covert detection of attractiveness among the neurologically intact: evidence from skin-conductance responses

Several studies have shown that participants, without a deficit in face recognition, give an increased skin conductance response (SCR) to familiar faces when presented subliminally, hence suggesting covert recognition of these faces. In the experiment presented here we manipulated familiarity and attractiveness and tested whether participants distinguished between faces for these variables when presented too fast to allow conscious recognition. Three sets of faces were presented: famous attractive; unfamiliar attractive; and unfamiliar less attractive. SCRs were the same for each category of faces whether presented subliminally or supraliminally, and were the same for attractive faces, whether famous or unfamiliar; however, SCRs differed between the attractive and less attractive faces. The findings support those of Stone et al (2001 Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience 1 183-191) and suggest that higher SCRs to famous faces are not necessarily due to covert recognition, but may be a response to the positive affective valence of the stimuli.     

基于名人面孔视觉特征和语义信息的视觉统计学习

视觉统计学习是指个体依据视觉刺激之间的转接概率来掌握统计规律的过程。本研究通过5个实验探讨了个体基于名人面孔视觉特征和语义信息进行视觉统计学习的加工机制。每个实验均包括熟悉(学习)和测试两个阶段：在熟悉阶段, 让被试观看名人面孔并完成重复图片探测的无关任务; 在测试阶段, 让被试进行二选一迫选任务。其中, 实验1和2分别考察基于名人面孔视觉特征和语义信息的视觉统计学习效果; 实验3分别考察基于名人面孔视觉特征和语义信息视觉进行统计学习的精确性; 实验4进一步考察基于名人面孔视觉特征和语义信息进行视觉统计学习的时间特征; 实验5验证基于名人面孔视觉特征的视觉统计学习具有面孔特异性。结果表明：个体能同时基于名人面孔视觉特征和语义信息进行精确的视觉统计学习; 基于正立名人面孔的视觉统计学习效果显著高于基于倒置名人面孔的视觉统计学习效果; 虽然基于视觉特征和语义信息的统计加工都具有一致的精确性, 但后者需要更多的加工时间。这提示：基于名人面孔视觉特征的视觉统计学习具有面孔特异性, 个体基于名人面孔视觉特征和语义信息的视觉统计学习过程是分离的, 统计运算发生于面孔特征加工完成之后。     

Repetition Priming Follows Spontaneous but not Prompted Recognition of Familiar Faces

Reaction times to make a familiarity decision to the faces of famous people were measured after recognition of the faces in a pre-training phase had occurred spontaneously or following prompting with a name or other cue. At test, reaction times to familiar faces that had been recognized spontaneously in the pre-training phase were significantly facilitated relative to an unprimed comparison condition. Reaction times to familiar faces recognized only after prompting in the pre-training phase were not significantly facilitated. This was demonstrated both when a name prompt was used (Experiments 1 and 3) and when subjects were cued with brief semantic information (Experiment 2).

Repetition priming was not found to depend on prior spontaneous recognition per se. In Experiment 3, spontaneously recognizing a familiar face did not prime subsequent familiarity judgements when the same face had only been identified following prompting on a prior encounter. In Experiment 4, recognition memory for faces recognized after cueing was found to be over 90% accurate. This indicates that prompted recognition does not yield repetition priming, even though subjects can remember the faces. A fusion of “face recognition unit” and “episodic record” accounts of the repetition priming effect may be more useful than either theory alone in explaining these results.     

Right hemisphere superiority in the recognition of famous faces

Words and famous faces were tachistoscopically presented in bilateral view to normal right-handed subjects. A left visual field advantage was obtained for famous faces whether naming or recognition from an array was required and a right visual field advantage was obtained for words. While the finding of a left visual field advantage for the recognition of famous faces is consistent with studies of face recognition deficits in brain-damaged patients, a right visual field advantage for the recognition of famous faces has recently been reported in normal subjects. Possible explanations for this discrepancy are discussed.