ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2014
Touching on face space: comparing visual and haptic processing of face shapes.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two representations of a high-dimensional perceptual space.Vision research · 2017Article
- Women's Preferences for Penis Size: A New Research Method Using Selection among 3D Models.PloS one · 2015Article
- Visuo-haptic multisensory object recognition, categorization, and representation.Frontiers in psychology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The idea that faces are represented within a structured face space (Valentine Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 43: 161-204, 1991) has gained considerable experimental support, from both physiological and perceptual studies. Recent work has also shown that faces can even be recognized haptically-that is, from touch alone. Although some evidence favors congruent processing strategies in the visual and haptic processing of faces, the question of how similar the two modalities are in terms of face processing remains open. Here, this question was addressed by asking whether there is evidence for a haptic face space, and if so, how it compares to visual face space. For this, a physical face space was created, consisting of six laser-scanned individual faces, their morphed average, 50%-morphs between two individual faces, as well as 50%-morphs of the individual faces with the average, resulting in a set of 19 faces. Participants then rated either the visual or haptic pairwise similarity of the tangible 3-D face shapes. Multidimensional scaling analyses showed that both modalities extracted perceptual spaces that conformed to critical predictions of the face space framework, hence providing support for similar processing of complex face shapes in haptics and vision. Despite the overall similarities, however, systematic differences also emerged between the visual and haptic data. These differences are discussed in the context of face processing and complex-shape processing in vision and haptics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24420727What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.