Facial Memory: The Role of the Pre-Existing Knowledge in Face Processing and Recognition (original) (raw)

Effect of Familiarity on the Processing of Human Faces

NeuroImage, 1999

Most brain imaging studies on face perception have investigated the processing of unknown faces and addressed mainly the question of specific face processing in the human brain. The goal of this study was to highlight the effects of familiarity on the visual processing of faces. Using [ 15 O]water 3D Positron Emission Tomography, regional cerebral blood flow distribution was measured in 11 human subjects performing an identical task (gender categorization) on both unknown and known faces. Subjects also performed two control tasks (a face recognition task and a visual pattern discrimination task). They were scanned after a training phase using videotapes during which they had been familiarized with and learned to recognize a set of faces. Two major results were obtained. On the one hand, we found bilateral activations of the fusiform gyri in the three face conditions, including the so-called fusiform-face area, a region in the right fusiform gyrus specifically devoted to face processing. This common activation suggests that different cognitive tasks performed on known and unknown faces require the involvement of this fusiform region. On the other hand, specific regional cerebral blood flow changes were related to the processing of known and unknown faces. The left amygdala, a structure involved in implicit learning of visual representations, was activated by the categorization task on unknown faces. The same task on known faces induced a relative decrease of activity in early visual areas. These differences between the two categorization tasks reveal that the human brain processes known and unknown faces differently. 1999 Academic Press

Mental representations of familiar faces

British Journal of Psychology, 2011

The Bruce and Young (1986) framework makes a number of important distinctions between the types of representation needed to recognize a familiar face. Here, we return to these, focussing particularly on face recognition units. We argue that such representations need to incorporate idiosyncratic within-person variability, asking questions such as 'What counts as a picture of Harrison Ford?'. We describe a mechanism for achieving this, and discuss the relation between image variability and episodic face memories, in the context of behavioural and neurophysiological data.

Recognition of briefly presented familiar and unfamiliar faces

Psihologija, 2009

Early processing stages in the perception of familiar and unfamiliar faces were studied in four experiments by varying the type of available facial information in a four alternative forced choice recognition task. Both reaction time and recognition accuracy served as dependent measures. The observed data revealed an asymmetry in processing familiar and unfamiliar faces. A markedly weak inversion effect and strong blurring effect suggest a limited usage of spatial relations within early processing stages of unfamiliar faces. Recognition performance for whole familiar faces did not deteriorate due to blurring or the presentation of isolated internal features, suggesting a low level of representation for featural properties of familiar faces. Based on the data we propose that recognition of familiar faces relies much more on spatial relations among features, particularly internal features, than on featural characteristics. In contrast, recognition of unfamiliar faces resorts mainly to featural information.

Face processing and familiarity: Evidence from eye‐movement data

British Journal of Psychology, 2005

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.

Face Familiarity and Image-Specific Memory

Perception, 2020

Face familiarity produces advantages for both memory and matching. By developing an internal representation through repeated experience, viewers extract identity-specific information that aids subsequent recognition. However, researchers have recently argued that this process may also result in a familiarity disadvantage, whereby specific instances of the face are more difficult to remember, perhaps due to this process of prioritising identity- over image-specific information. Although previous experiments found no evidence of this disadvantage in working memory, initial research has demonstrated an effect in longer term storage. Here, we attempted to replicate this finding by focussing on the ability to learn images of a single (un)familiar identity. Our results failed to demonstrate a familiarity disadvantage while replicating the finding that familiarity influences response bias. As researchers continue to investigate how familiarity alters both internal representations and assoc...

Unfamiliar faces are not faces: Evidence from a matching task

Memory & Cognition, 2006

It is difficult to match two images of the same unfamiliar face, even under good conditions. Here, we show that there are large individual differences on unfamiliar face matching. Initially, we tried to predict these using tests of visual short-term memory, cognitive style, and perceptual speed. Moderate correlations were produced by various components of these tests. In three other experiments, we found very strong correlations between face matching and inverted face matching on the same test. Finally, we examined potential associations between familiar and unfamiliar face processing. Strong correlations were found between familiar and unfamiliar face processing, but only when the familiar faces were inverted. We conclude that unfamiliar faces are processed for identity in a qualitatively different way than are familiar faces.

Why It’s Easier to Remember Seeing a Face We Already Know Than One We Don’t

Psychological Science, 2013

In two experiments, we provided support for the hypothesis that stimuli with preexisting memory representations (e.g., famous faces) are easier to associate to their encoding context than are stimuli that lack long-term memory representations (e.g., unknown faces). Subjects viewed faces superimposed on different backgrounds (e.g., the Eiffel Tower). Face recognition on a surprise memory test was better when the encoding background was reinstated than when it was swapped with a different background; however, the reinstatement advantage was modulated by how many faces had been seen with a given background, and reinstatement did not improve recognition for unknown faces. The follow-up experiment added a drug intervention that inhibited the ability to form new associations. Context reinstatement did not improve recognition for famous or unknown faces under the influence of the drug. The results suggest that it is easier to associate context to faces that have a preexisting long-term mem...