Face processing does not predict reading ability in developmental prosopagnosia: A commentary on

"Calculating faces": can face perception paradigms enrich dyscalculia research?

Developmental dyscalculia (DD) is a subtype of learning disabilities, which is characterized by lower mathematical skills despite average intelligence and average or satisfactory performance in other academic areas. It is not fully understood how such deficits emerge in the course of brain development. When considering the mechanisms of dyscalculia, two domain-specific systems are distinguished. The Approximate Number System (ANS) is related to the approximate estimation of large sets, and the Object Tracking System (OTS) is responsible for subitizing, that is, the exact quantification of small sets. In recent years, the multiple-deficit framework has become increasingly popular. On the one hand, it explains the impairment of certain general cognitive functions in children with DD, such as executive functions, attention, visual-perceptual discrimination, processing speed, and rapid scanning of visual information. On the other hand, it provides a theoretical basis for explaining the simultaneous occurrence of the different types of other comorbid conditions (such as dyslexia and ADHD) and the relationship between them. We suggest that the face recognition could be considered as another, probably impaired function in dyscalculic individuals. We highlight several brain areas involved both in numerical and facial processing: intraparietal sulcus (IPS), fusiform gyrus (FFG), and hippocampus (HC). We consider the possibility of expanding the scope of dyscalculia research by application of face perception paradigms.

A new approach to diagnosing and researching developmental prosopagnosia: Excluded cases are impaired too

Developmental prosopagnosia is characterized by severe, lifelong difficulties when recognizing facial identity. Unfortunately, the most common diagnostic assessment (Cambridge Face Memory Test) misses 50-65% of individuals who believe that they have this condition. This results in such excluded cases' absence from scientific knowledge, effect sizes of impairment potentially overestimated, treatment efficacy underrated, and may elicit in them a negative experience of research. To estimate their symptomology and group-level impairments in face processing, we recruited a large cohort who believes that they have prosopagnosia. Matching prior reports, 56% did not meet criteria on the Cambridge Face Memory Test. However, the severity of their prosopagnosia symptoms and holistic perception deficits were comparable to those who did meet criteria. Excluded cases also exhibited face perception and memory impairments that were roughly one standard deviation below neurotypical norms, indicating the presence of objective problems. As the prosopagnosia index correctly classified virtually every case, we propose it should be the primary method for providing a diagnosis, prior to subtype categorization. We present researchers with a plan on how they can analyze these excluded prosopagnosia cases in their future work without negatively impacting their traditional findings. We anticipate such inclusion will enhance scientific knowledge, more accurately estimate effect sizes of impairments and treatments, and identify commonalities and distinctions between these different forms of prosopagnosia. Owing to their atypicalities in visual perception, we recommend that the prosopagnosia index should be used to screen out potential prosopagnosia cases from broader vision research.

Interdependency in lateralization of written word and face processing in right-handed individuals

It has been suggested that the right hemisphere lateralization typically observed for face processing may depend on lateralization of written word processing to the left hemisphere; a pattern referred to as the causal complementary principle of lateralization. According to a strong version of this principle, a correlation should be found between the degree of left and right hemisphere lateralization for word and face processing respectively. This has been observed in two studies, but only for left-handed individuals. The present study tested whether a similar lateralization pattern could be found in a relatively large sample of right-handed individuals (N = 210) using behavioral measures (divided visual field paradigms). It was also tested whether the degree of right hemisphere lateralization for face and global shape processing would correlate positively, as predicted by a strong version of the input asymmetry principle of lateralization. This was tested in a subsample (n = 189). Bayesian analyses found no evidence for lateralization interdependency as the observed data were 4-17 times more likely under the null hypothesis. Unfortunately, the reliabilities of the lateralization measures were found to be poor. While this dampens the firmness of the conclusions that can be drawn, it is argued that at present there is no positive evidence for strong interdependency between written word and face processing in right-handed individuals.

The mechanisms supporting holistic perception of words and faces are not independent

The question of whether word and face recognition rely on overlapping or dissociable neural and cognitive mechanisms received considerable attention in the literature. In the present work, we presented words (aligned or misaligned) superimposed on faces (aligned or misaligned) and tested the interference from the unattended stimulus category on holistic processing of the attended category. In Experiment 1, we found that holistic face processing is reduced when a face was overlaid with an unattended, aligned word (processed holistically). In Experiment 2, we found a similar reduction of holistic processing for words when a word was superimposed on an unattended, aligned face (processed holistically). This reciprocal interference effect indicates a trade-off in holistic processing of the two stimuli, consistent with the idea that word and face recognition may rely on non-independent, overlapping mechanisms.