Spatial location in brief, free-viewing face encoding modulates contextual face recognition

Where and when matter in visual recognition

Our perceptual system processes only a selected subset of an incoming stream of stimuli due to sensory biases and limitations in spatial and temporal attention and working memory capacity. In this study, we investigated perceptual access to sensory information that was temporally predictable or unpredictable and spread across the visual field. In a visual recognition task, participants were presented with an array of different number of alphabetical stimuli that were followed by a probe with a delay. They had to indicate whether the probe was included in the stimulus-set or not. To test the impact of temporal attention, coloured cues that were displayed before the visual stimuli indicated the presentation onset of the stimulus-set. We found that temporal predictability of stimulus onset yields higher performance. In addition, recognition performance was biased across the visual field with higher performance for stimuli that were presented on the upper and right visual quadrants. Our findings demonstrate that recognition accuracy is enhanced by temporal cues and has an inherently asymmetric shape across the visual field.

Development of upper visual field bias for faces in infants

The spatial location of the face and body seen in daily life influences human perception and recognition. This contextual effect of spatial locations suggests that daily experience affects how humans visually process the face and body. However, it remains unclear whether this effect is caused by experience, or innate neural pathways. To address this issue, we examined the development of visual field asymmetry for face processing, in which faces in the upper visual field were processed preferentially compared to the lower visual field. We found that a developmental change occurred between 6 and 7 months. Older infants aged 7-8 months showed bias toward faces in the upper visual field, similar to adults, but younger infants of 5-6 months showed no such visual field bias. Furthermore, older infants preferentially memorized faces in the upper visual field, rather than in the lower visual field. These results suggest that visual field asymmetry is acquired through development, and might be caused by the learning of spatial location in daily experience.

Identifying criminals: No biasing effect of criminal context on recalled threat

To date, it is still unclear whether there is a systematic pattern in the errors made in eyewitness recall and whether certain features of a person are more likely to lead to false identification. Moreover, we also do not know the extent of systematic errors impacting identification of a person from their body rather than solely their face. To address this, based on the contextual model of eyewitness identification (CMEI; Osborne & Davies, 2014, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28[3], 392-402), we hypothesized that having framed a target as a perpetrator of a violent crime, participants would recall that target person as appearing more like a stereotypical criminal (i.e., more threatening). In three separate experiments, participants were first presented with either no frame, a neutral frame, or a criminal frame (perpetrators of a violent crime) accompanying a target (either a face or body). Participants were then asked to identify the original target from a selection of people that varied in facial threat or body musculature. Contrary to our hypotheses, we found no evidence of bias. However, identification accuracy was highest for the most threatening target bodies high in musculature, as well as bodies paired with detailed neutral contextual information. Overall, these findings suggest that while no systematic bias exists in the recall of criminal bodies, the nature of the body itself and the context in which it is presented can significantly impact identification accuracy.

The influence of spatial location on same-different judgments of facial identity and expression

The "spatial congruency bias" is a behavioral phenomenon where 2 objects presented sequentially are more likely to be judged as being the same object if they are presented in the same location (Golomb, Kupitz, & Thiemann, 2014), suggesting that irrelevant spatial location information may be bound to object representations. Here, we examine whether the spatial congruency bias extends to higher-level object judgments of facial identity and expression. On each trial, 2 real-world faces were sequentially presented in variable screen locations, and subjects were asked to make same-different judgments on the facial expression (Experiments 1-2) or facial identity (Experiment 3) of the stimuli. We observed a robust spatial congruency bias for judgments of facial identity, yet a more fragile one for judgments of facial expression. Subjects were more likely to judge 2 faces as displaying the same expression if they were presented in the same location (compared to in different locations), but only when the faces shared the same identity. On the other hand, a spatial congruency bias was found when subjects made judgments on facial identity, even across faces displaying different facial expressions. These findings suggest a possible difference between the binding of facial identity and facial expression to spatial location. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Asymmetries During Multiple Face Encoding: Increased Dwell Time and Number of Fixations in the Upper Visual Hemifield

Visual field asymmetries in the encoding of groups of faces have rarely been investigated. Here, eye movements (percentage of dwell time [pDT] and number of fixations [nFix]) were recorded during the encoding of three groups of four faces tagged with cheating, cooperative, or neutral behaviours. Faces in each group were placed in the top left, top right, bottom left, or bottom right quadrants. Face recall was equally high in the three behavioural groups. Conversely, pDT and nFix were higher for faces in the upper hemifields. Most of the first saccades were made to the top left visual quadrant, which also commanded a higher pDT and nFix than the other quadrants. The findings are relevant to the understanding of visual field asymmetries in the processing of multiple faces, a common social scenario, and may be linked to reading habits in conjunction (or not) with cultural and environmental cues.

Behavioral Differences in the Upper and Lower Visual Hemifields in Shape and Motion Perception

Perceptual accuracy is known to be influenced by stimuli location within the visual field. In particular, it seems to be enhanced in the lower visual hemifield (VH) for motion and space processing, and in the upper VH for object and face processing. The origins of such asymmetries are attributed to attentional biases across the visual field, and in the functional organization of the visual system. In this article, we tested content-dependent perceptual asymmetries in different regions of the visual field. Twenty-five healthy volunteers participated in this study. They performed three visual tests involving perception of shapes, orientation and motion, in the four quadrants of the visual field. The results of the visual tests showed that perceptual accuracy was better in the lower than in the upper visual field for motion perception, and better in the upper than in the lower visual field for shape perception. Orientation perception did not show any vertical bias. No difference was found when comparing right and left VHs. The functional organization of the visual system seems to indicate that the dorsal and the ventral visual streams, responsible for motion and shape perception, respectively, show a bias for the lower and upper VHs, respectively. Such a bias depends on the content of the visual information.

Gaining the upper hand: evidence of vertical asymmetry in sex-categorisation of human hands

Visual perception is characterised by asymmetries arising from the brain's preferential response to particular stimulus types at different retinal locations. Where the lower visual field (LVF) holds an advantage over the upper visual field (UVF) for many tasks (e.g., hue discrimination, contrast sensitivity, motion processing), face-perception appears best supported at above-fixation locations (Quek & Finkbeiner, 2014a). This finding is consistent with Previc's (1990) suggestion that vision in the UVF has become specialised for object recognition processes often required in "extrapersonal" space. Outside of faces, however, there have been very few investigations of vertical asymmetry effects for higher-level objects. Our aim in the present study was, thus, to determine whether the UVF advantage reported for face-perception would extend to a nonface object - human hands. Participants classified the sex of hand images presented above or below central fixation by reaching out to touch a left or right response panel. On each trial, a briefly presented spatial cue captured the participant's spatial attention to either the location where the hand was about to appear (valid cue) or the opposite location (invalid cue). We observed that cue validity only modulated the efficiency of the sex-categorisation response for targets in the LVLVF and not the UVF, just as we have reported previously for face-sex categorisation (Quek & Finkbeiner, 2014a). Taken together, the data from these studies provide some empirical support for Previc's (1990) speculation that object recognition processes may enjoy an advantage in the upper-hemifield.