ArticlePloS one2025
Facing distortion: Impact of spatial distortions on upright and inverted face identification.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Face identification is a critical activity of daily living that may be impaired by blur or distortions caused by vision loss or prosopometamorphopsia. In this study, we examine the face inversion effect as a benchmark for understanding how distortions impact the identification of upright and inverted faces. Bandpass-filtered noise (Fpeak@1-32 cycles/face) was used to generate pixel shifts to distort calm and neutral faces from a standardized face database. The amplitude of distortion was varied using an adaptive staircase. 8 normally sighted subjects were given unlimited time to identify which of 4 distorted faces matched the identity of an undistorted reference face, each presented in a 6.5°-9.8° ellipse in a 2*2 grid. Image cues were removed from each face by equalizing them to the luminance distribution and chrominance of the average face. There was a significant interaction between face orientation and distortion frequency (F5,35 = 2.72, p = 0.0354), where sensitivity as a function of distortion frequency monotonically increased for inverted faces but was asymetrically U-shaped with a vertex at 4-8 cycles/face for upright faces. For upright faces, thresholds were lowest at mid spatial frequencies, with significant differences (p < 0.05) observed at the highest frequencies (16 and 32 cpi), supporting an asymmetric U-shaped tuning profile. In contrast, thresholds for inverted faces increased progressively across spatial frequencies, consistent with a monotonic trend. These results suggest that upright face recognition is most impacted by distortions at mid frequencies, whereas inverted face recognition declines more linearly as spatial frequency increases. The peak distortion frequency is correlated with the distance between the eyes, consistent with a critical role for eye geometry in upright face identification. These results suggest that the face inversion effect for distortion is selective for high-frequency bands.
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.