Inversion and contrast-reversal effects on face processing assessed by MEG (original) (raw)
Related papers
Recognising upright and inverted faces: MEG source localisation
Brain Research, 2011
Face recognition is a complex cognitive task that involves a distributed network of neural sources. While some components of this network have been identified, the temporal sequence of these components is not well understood. Magnetoencephalography (MEG), analyzed with a spatial filtering source localisation algorithm, was used to determine frontal contributions to face recognition. We tested 22 adults (mean age 26.3 years; 10 females).
Neuroscience, 2003
The neurophysiological basis of the face inversion effect was studied with magneto-and electro-encephalography in 10 normal subjects. Spatiotemporal analyses using dipole modeling was performed on combined evoked magneto and electro-encephalography data to hemifield presentation of upright and inverted faces and objects. Inferior temporal cortex, i.e. fusiform gyrus, and lateral temporal cortex near the superior temporal sulcus were activated simultaneously, but independently, at 140 -200 ms post-stimulus to upright and inverted unfamiliar faces. Right hemisphere inferior temporal cortex and lateral temporal cortex were active in all subjects, and in the left hemisphere in half the subjects. Latencies to inverted relative to upright faces were longer in the right hemisphere, and shorter in the left hemisphere. For right hemifield stimulation ipsilateral activation delay was around 18 -19 ms for both upright and inverted faces and was calculated from all 10 subjects. For left hemifield stimulation, and the data from 7 of 10 subjects, it was 22 and 29 ms to upright and inverted faces, respectively.
Cognitive Response Profile of the Human Fusiform Face Area as Determined by MEG
Cerebral Cortex, 2000
Activation in or near the fusiform gyrus was estimated to faces and control stimuli. Activation peaked at 165 ms and was strongest to digitized photographs of human faces, regardless of whether they were presented in color or grayscale, suggesting that face-and color-specific areas are functionally separate. Schematic sketches evoked ∼30% less activation than did face photographs. Scrambling the locations of facial features reduced the response by ∼25% in either hemisphere, suggesting that configurational versus analytic processing is not lateralized at this latency. Animal faces evoked ∼50% less activity, and common objects, animal bodies or sensory controls evoked ∼80% less activity than human faces. The (small) responses evoked by meaningless control images were stronger when they included surfaces and shading, suggesting that the fusiform gyrus may use these features in constructing its facespecific response. Putative fusiform activation was not significantly related to stimulus repetition, gender or emotional expression. A midline occipital source significantly distinguished between faces and control images as early as 110 ms, but was more sensitive to sensory qualities. This source significantly distinguished happy and sad faces from those with neutral expressions. We conclude that the fusiform gyrus may selectively encode faces at 165 ms, transforming sensory input for further processing.
The impact of inversion on the extraction of relational and featural face information was investigated in two fMRI experiments. Unlike previous studies, the contribution of horizontal and vertical spatial relations were considered separately since they have been shown to be differentially vulnerable to face inversion (Goffaux & Rossion, 2007). Hence, inversion largely affects the perception of vertical relations (e.g. eye or mouth height) while the processing of features (e.g. eye shape and surface) and of horizontal relations (e.g. inter-ocular distance) is affected to a far lesser extent. Participants viewed pairs of faces that differed either at the level of one local feature (i.e. the eyes) or of the spatial relations of this feature with adjacent features. Changes of spatial relations were divided into two conditions, depending on the vertical or horizontal axis of the modifications. These stimulus conditions were presented in separate blocks in the first (block) experiment while they were presented in a random order in the second event-related (ER) experiment. Face-preferring voxels located in the right-lateralized middle fusiform gyrus (rMFG) largely decreased their activity with inversion. Inversion-related decreases were more moderate in left-lateralized middle fusiform gyrus (lMFG). ER experiment revealed that inversion affected rMFG and lMFG activity in distinct stimulus conditions. Whereas inversion affected lMFG processing only in featural condition, inversion selectively affected the processing of vertical relations in rMFG. Correlation analyses further indicated that the inversion effect (IE) observed in rMFG and right inferior occipital gyrus (rIOG) reliably predicted the large behavioural IE observed for the processing of vertical relations. In contrast, lMFG IE correlated with the weak behavioural IE observed for the processing of horizontal relations. Our findings suggest that face configuration is mostly encoded in rMFG, whereas more local aspects of face information, such as features and horizontal spatial relations drive lMFG processing. These findings corroborate the view that the vulnerability of face perception to inversion stems mainly from the disrupted processing of vertical face relations in the right-lateralized network of face-preferring regions (rMFG, rIOG).
Spatio-temporal localization of the face inversion effect: an event-related potentials study
Event-related potentials (ERPs) from 58 electrodes at standard EEG sites were recorded while 14 subjects performed a delayed-matching task on normal and inverted faces. A large and single difference between normal and inverted face processing was observed at occipitotemporal sites about 160 ms following stimulus onset, mainly in the right hemisphere (RH). Although the topographies indicate that similar areas are involved at this latency in processing the two types of stimuli, the electrophysiological activity, which corresponds to the previously described N170, was larger and delayed for inverted as compared to normal face processing. These results complement and specify, at a neural level, previous behavioral and divided visual field studies which have suggested that the loss of configural face information by inversion may slow down and increase the difficulty of face processing, particularly in the RH.
Lateralization of face processing in the human brain
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2012
Are visual face processing mechanisms the same in the left and right cerebral hemispheres? The possibility of such ‘duplicated processing’ seems puzzling in terms of neural resource usage, and we currently lack a precise characterization of the lateral differences in face processing. To address this need, we have undertaken a three-pronged approach. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we assessed cortical sensitivity to facial semblance, the modulatory effects of context and temporal response dynamics. Results on all three fronts revealed systematic hemispheric differences. We found that: (i) activation patterns in the left fusiform gyrus correlate with image-level face-semblance, while those in the right correlate with categorical face/non-face judgements. (ii) Context exerts significant excitatory/inhibitory influence in the left, but has limited effect on the right. (iii) Face-selectivity persists in the right even after activity on the left has returned to baseline. The...
Journal of Neuropsychology, 2009
The impact of inversion on the extraction of relational and featural face information was investigated in two fMRI experiments. Unlikep revious studies, the contribution of horizontal and vertical spatial relations werec onsidered separately since they have been shown to be differentially vulnerable to face inversion (Goffaux &Rossion, 2007). Hence,inversion largely affects the perception of vertical relations (e.g. eyeormouth height) while the processing of features (e.g. eyes hape and surface) and of horizontal relations (e.g. inter-ocular distance) is affected to afar lesser extent. Participants viewed pairs of faces that differed either at the level of one local feature( i.e.t he eyes) or of the spatial relations of this featurewith adjacent features. Changes of spatial relations wered ivided into two conditions, depending on the vertical or horizontal axis of the modifications. These stimulus conditions werepresented in separate blocks in the first (block) experiment while they werepresented in arandom orderinthe second eventrelated(ER) experiment. Face-preferring voxels located in the right-lateralized middle fusiform gyrus (rMFG) largely decreased their activity with inversion. Inversion-related decreases werem ore moderate in left-lateralized middle fusiform gyrus (lMFG). ER experiment revealed that inversion affected rMFG and lMFG activity in distinct stimulus conditions. Whereas inversion affected lMFG processing only in featural condition, inversion selectivelyaffected the processing of vertical relations in rMFG. Correlation analyses further indicated that the inversion effect (IE) observedi nr MFG and right inferior occipital gyrus (rIOG) reliably predicted the large behavioural IE observedfor the processing of vertical relations. In contrast, lMFG IE correlated with the weak behavioural IE observed for the processing of horizontal relations. Our findings suggest
BMC Neuroscience, 2009
Background: While there is a general agreement that picture-plane inversion is more detrimental to face processing than to other seemingly complex visual objects, the origin of this effect is still largely debatable. Here, we address the question of whether face inversion reflects a quantitative or a qualitative change in processing mode by investigating the pattern of event-related potential (ERP) response changes with picture plane rotation of face and house pictures. Thorough analyses of topographical (Scalp Current Density maps, SCD) and dipole source modeling were also conducted.
Inversion Effects in Face-selective Cortex with Combinations of Face Parts
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2013
■ The face inversion effect has been used as a basis for claims about the specialization of face-related perceptual and neural processes. One of these claims is that the fusiform face area (FFA) is the site of face-specific feature-based and/or configural/ holistic processes that are responsible for producing the face inversion effect. However, the studies on which these claims were based almost exclusively used stimulus manipulations of whole faces. Here, we tested inversion effects using single, discrete features and combinations of multiple discrete features, in addition to whole faces, using both behavioral and fMRI measurements. In agreement with previous studies, we found behavioral inversion effects with whole faces and no inversion effects with a single eye stimulus or the two eyes in combina-tion. However, we also found behavioral inversion effects with feature combination stimuli that included features in the top and bottom halves (eyes-mouth and eyes-nose-mouth). Activation in the FFA showed an inversion effect for the whole-face stimulus only, which did not match the behavioral pattern. Instead, a pattern of activation consistent with the behavior was found in the bilateral inferior frontal gyrus, which is a component of the extended face-preferring network. The results appear inconsistent with claims that the FFA is the site of face-specific feature-based and/or configural/holistic processes that are responsible for producing the face inversion effect. They are more consistent with claims that the FFA shows a stimulus preference for whole upright faces. ■