Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40883556›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2025

Second-order facial features are processed analytically in composite faces.

Xue Jun Cheng, Daniel R Little

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2025. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  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

2 authors.

Xue Jun ChengMelbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Daniel R LittleMelbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. daniel.little@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3607-5525

Funding

Australian Research Council DP160102360, DP240100979, DP240101511
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In contrast to claims of holistic processing, upright aligned composite face morphs were recently shown to be processed in the same manner as inverted or misaligned composite face morphs (Cheng et al. 2018. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 44, 833-862). In the present paper, we replicate that work, using a set of schematic faces which vary second-order features (e.g., lip height and eye separation) in the top and bottom halves of the schematic face. We find that the present stimuli show the hallmarks of holistic processing in a complete composite face task, but differ from composite face morphs in that the best fitting MDS metric is more commensurate with an assumption of integrality (i.e., Euclidean distance). Nevertheless, we also find that, as with morph faces, the processing of upright aligned and upright misaligned faces is consistent with a mixture of serial and parallel processing. Importantly, we found little evidence of any strong holistic pooling of the top and bottom face halves into a single object. These results remain consistent with the idea that composite faces are not processed differently from other objects with separable dimensions but instead that composite faces allow more parallel processing when aligned than when misaligned. Data and code are available from: http://github.com/knowlabUnimelb/SCHEMATICFACERULES .

Indexed as

Facial RecognitionPattern Recognition, VisualAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultFace perceptionHolistic processingInformation processingSystems factorial technology

Identifiers

PMID40883556
PMCPMC12568841

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.