Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29966716›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2018

Distinct neural processes for the perception of familiar versus unfamiliar faces along the visual hierarchy revealed by EEG.

Elliot Collins, Amanda K Robinson, Marlene Behrmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Sustained neural representations of personally familiar people and places during cued recall.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. The nature of neural object representations during dynamic occlusion.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Influence of Object-Color Knowledge on Emerging Object Representations in the Brain.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. How face perception unfolds over time.Nature communications · 2019
    Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Elliot CollinsDepartment of Psychology and Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, Carnegie Mellon University, USA; School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA. Electronic address: egcollin@andrew.cmu.edu.
Amanda K RobinsonDepartment of Psychology and Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, Carnegie Mellon University, USA; School of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Australia; ARC Centre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Department of Cognitive Science, Macquarie University, Australia.
Marlene BehrmannDepartment of Psychology and Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, Carnegie Mellon University, USA.

Funding

TRAINING PROGRAM FOR MD/PHD STUDENTST32GM008208 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI STEINMAN, RICHARD A · 1987 to 2021
$15.4M
Predoctoral Training Program in Behavioral Brain ResearchT32GM081760 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI FIEZ, JULIE A, HOLT, LORI L · 2007 to 2021
$4.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008208NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM081760
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans recognize faces with ease, despite the complexity of the task and of the visual system which underlies it. Different spatial regions, including both the core and extended face processing networks, and distinct temporal stages of processing have been implicated in face recognition, but there is ongoing controversy regarding the extent to which the mechanisms for recognizing a familiar face differ from those for an unfamiliar face. Here, we used electroencephalogram (EEG) and flicker SSVEP, a high signal-to-noise approach, and searchlight decoding methods to elucidate the mechanisms mediating the processing of familiar and unfamiliar faces in the time domain. Familiar and unfamiliar faces were presented periodically at 15 Hz, 6 Hz and 3.75 Hz either upright or inverted in separate blocks, with the rationale that faster frequencies require shorter processing times per image and tap into fundamentally different levels of visual processing. The 15 Hz trials, likely to reflect early visual processing, exhibited enhanced neural responses for familiar over unfamiliar face trials, but only when the faces were upright. In contrast, decoding methods revealed similar classification accuracies for upright and inverted faces for both familiar and unfamiliar faces. For the 6 Hz frequency, familiar faces had lower amplitude responses than unfamiliar faces, and decoding familiarity was more accurate for upright compared with inverted faces. Finally, the 3.75 Hz frequency revealed no main effects of familiarity, but decoding showed significant correlations with behavioral ratings of face familiarity, suggesting that activity evoked by this slow presentation frequency reflected higher-level, cognitive aspects of familiarity processing. This three-way dissociation between frequencies reveals that fundamentally different stages of the visual hierarchy are modulated by face familiarity. The combination of experimental and analytical approaches used here represent a novel method for elucidating spatio-temporal characteristics within the visual system.

Indexed as

AdultCerebral CortexElectroencephalographyFacial RecognitionFemaleHumansMaleRecognition, PsychologyResearch DesignYoung AdultEEGFace processingFace recognitionFamous facesFPVSFrequency tagging

Identifiers

PMID29966716
PMCPMC6139062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.