4.5 Article

The timing of individual face recognition in the brain

Journal

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
Volume 50, Issue 7, Pages 1451-1461

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.02.030

Keywords

Electroencephalography; ERPs; Face perception; Face space; N170; P2; N250

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. Canada Foundation for Innovation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous neural research on face perception has mainly focused on the distinction between faces and non-face stimuli. However, the brain mechanisms for differentiating one face from another are not well understood. In the present study, using scalp-recorded event-related potentials (ERPs), we investigated the brain responses to faces that varied in identity strength as a result of morphing individual faces to an average face in steps of 10%. Participants performed a face identification task. Behavioral results showed categorical boundaries of face identification at 30% and 70%. Face identity strength related to initial brain responses occurring shortly after 200 ms in the ventral P2 and the N250 components: stronger identity strength was associated with a smaller P2 and a larger N250. In contrast, the brain responses within 200 ms, as reflected by the P1, the N170, and the dorsal P2 component, were not affected by face identity strength. Consistent with recent imaging studies and animal research, our results provide the ERP evidence for brain responses to variations in face identity strength relative to an average face. Furthermore, with the high temporal resolution of ERPs, our results help to clarify the timing of neural events that are associated with the different stages involved in recognizing individual faces, thus providing a timeline for the classical face recognition model in the brain. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available