ArticleCognitive processing2023
Exploring pattern recognition: what is the relationship between the recognition of words, faces and other objects?
Article in Cognitive processing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Domain Specificity vs. Domain Generality: The Case of Faces and Words.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Debate surrounds processes of visual recognition, with no consensus as to whether recognition of distinct object categories (faces, bodies, cars, and words) is domain specific or subserved by domain-general visual recognition mechanisms. Here, we investigated correlations between the performance of 74 participants on recognition tasks for words, faces and other object categories. Participants completed a counter-balanced test battery of the Cambridge Face, Car and Body Parts Memory tests, as well as a standard four category lexical decision task, with response time and recognition accuracy as dependent variables. Results revealed significant correlations across domains for both recognition accuracy and response time, providing some support for domain-general pattern recognition. Further exploration of the data using principal component analysis (PCA) revealed a two-component model for both the response time and accuracy data. However, how the various word and object recognition tasks fitted these components varied considerably but did hint at familiarity/expertise as a common factor. In sum, we argue a complex relationship exists between domain-specific processing and domain-general processing, but that this is shaped by expertise. To further our understanding of pattern recognition, research investigating the recognition of words, faces and other objects in dyslexic individuals is recommended, as is research exploiting neuroimaging methodologies, with excellent temporal resolution, to chart the temporal specifics of different forms of visual pattern recognition.
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.