ArticleScientific reports2026
Gaze dynamics toward familiar and unfamiliar faces in prosopagnosia.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recognizing familiar faces is typically fast and automatic in neurotypical individuals but is markedly impaired in congenital prosopagnosia (CP) – a lifelong face recognition deficit without apparent brain injury. While previous research has focused on deficits in face perception or gaze to facial features in CP, it remains unclear whether individuals with CP can use facial familiarity, either explicitly or implicitly, to guide gaze dynamics in goal-directed tasks. Here, we investigated whether familiarity modulates gaze behavior in individuals with CP using two tasks previously validated in neurotypical populations: a face memorization task and a visual search task, each involving displays with both familiar (famous) and unfamiliar faces. The familiar faces in these tasks were categorized as either explicitly or implicitly visually recognized, based on participants’ ability to identify them by both image and name or only by name (respectively). Although individuals with CP performed worse than controls across both tasks (exhibiting lower accuracy and slower response times) they nonetheless showed preserved guidance of gaze by facial familiarity. When familiarity was explicit, their gaze patterns closely resembled those of neurotypical controls, with attention adjusted according to task demands: spending less time on familiar faces during memorization and more time on them during visual search. Notably, gaze differences also emerged for implicitly familiar faces, which, despite not being consciously recognized by image, elicited distinct viewing patterns compared to unfamiliar faces. These findings suggest that individuals with CP retain residual familiarity representation that can guide gaze even without explicit recognition. This provides novel evidence for preserved implicit processing in CP and advances our understanding of attention and memory mechanisms in face 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.