Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?

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 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. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience MIT Press

Can Face Recognition Really be Dissociated from Object Recognition?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/mit-press/can-face-recognition-really-be-dissociated-from-object-recognition-13fkz50y9M
Publisher
MIT Press
Copyright
© 1999 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
ISSN
0898-929X
eISSN
1530-8898
DOI
10.1162/089892999563472
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

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.

Journal

Journal of Cognitive NeuroscienceMIT Press

Published: Jul 1, 1999

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off