ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020
Stimulus-Specific Individual Differences in Holistic Perception of Mooney Faces.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- MooneyMaker: A Python package to create ambiguous two-tone images.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Increased face perception in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis: mechanisms, sex differences, and clinical correlates.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Facial ambiguity and perception: How face-likeness affects breaking time in continuous flash suppression.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Detection of Mooney faces is robust to image asymmetries produced by illumination.Journal of vision · 2023Article
- Individual differences in classification images of Mooney faces.Journal of vision · 2022Article
- Relative tuning of holistic face processing towards the fovea.Vision research · 2022Article
- Idiosyncratic biases in the perception of medical images.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Global and high-level effects in crowding cannot be predicted by either high-dimensional pooling or target cueing.Journal of vision · 2021Article
- Holistic ensemble perception.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans perceive faces holistically rather than as a set of separate features. Previous work demonstrates that some individuals are better at this holistic type of processing than others. Here, we show that there are unique individual differences in holistic processing of specific Mooney faces. We operationalized the increased difficulty of recognizing a face when inverted compared to upright as a measure of the degree to which individual Mooney faces were processed holistically by individual observers. Our results show that Mooney faces vary considerably in the extent to which they tap into holistic processing; some Mooney faces require holistic processing more than others. Importantly, there is little between-subject agreement about which faces are processed holistically; specific faces that are processed holistically by one observer are not by other observers. Essentially, what counts as holistic for one person is unique to that particular observer. Interestingly, we found that the per-face, per-observer differences in face discrimination only occurred for harder Mooney faces that required relatively more holistic processing. These findings suggest that holistic processing of hard Mooney faces depends on a particular observer's experience whereas processing of easier, cartoon-like Mooney faces can proceed universally for everyone. Future work using Mooney faces in perception research should take these stimulus-specific individual differences into account to best isolate holistic processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.