Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26074838›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2015

Segmentation precedes face categorization under suboptimal conditions.

Carlijn Van Den Boomen, Johannes J Fahrenfort, Tineke M Snijders, Chantal Kemner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carlijn Van Den BoomenDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands ; Department of Developmental Psychology, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands.
Johannes J FahrenfortDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands ; Department of Cognitive Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Tineke M SnijdersDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands ; Department of Developmental Psychology, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands ; Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging, Radboud University Nijmegen Nijmegen, Netherlands ; Centre for Language Studies, Radboud University Nijmegen Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Chantal KemnerDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands ; Department of Developmental Psychology, Utrecht University Utrecht, Netherlands ; Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht, Netherlands.
Utrecht University · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Both categorization and segmentation processes play a crucial role in face perception. However, the functional relation between these subprocesses is currently unclear. The present study investigates the temporal relation between segmentation-related and category-selective responses in the brain, using electroencephalography (EEG). Surface segmentation and category content were both manipulated using texture-defined objects, including faces. This allowed us to study brain activity related to segmentation and to categorization. In the main experiment, participants viewed texture-defined objects for a duration of 800 ms. EEG results revealed that segmentation-related responses precede category-selective responses. Three additional experiments revealed that the presence and timing of categorization depends on stimulus properties and presentation duration. Photographic objects were presented for a long and short (92 ms) duration and evoked fast category-selective responses in both cases. On the other hand, presentation of texture-defined objects for a short duration only evoked segmentation-related but no category-selective responses. Category-selective responses were much slower when evoked by texture-defined than by photographic objects. We suggest that in case of categorization of objects under suboptimal conditions, such as when low-level stimulus properties are not sufficient for fast object categorization, segmentation facilitates the slower categorization process.

Indexed as

categorizationEEGface processinghigh-level visionlow-level visionvisual system

Identifiers

PMID26074838
PMCPMC4443255
OpenAlexW1567985657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.