How Many Faces Can Be Processed during a Single Eye Fixation?

Comparing the visual spans for faces and letters

The visual span-the number of adjacent text letters that can be reliably recognized on one fixation-has been proposed as a sensory bottleneck that limits reading speed (Legge, Mansfield, & Chung, 2001). Like reading, searching for a face is an important daily task that involves pattern recognition. Is there a similar limitation on the number of faces that can be recognized in a single fixation? Here we report on a study in which we measured and compared the visual-span profiles for letter and face recognition. A serial two-stage model for pattern recognition was developed to interpret the data. The first stage is characterized by factors limiting recognition of isolated letters or faces, and the second stage represents the interfering effect of nearby stimuli on recognition. Our findings show that the visual span for faces is smaller than that for letters. Surprisingly, however, when differences in first-stage processing for letters and faces are accounted for, the two visual spans become nearly identical. These results suggest that the concept of visual span may describe a common sensory bottleneck that underlies different types of pattern recognition.

The mere exposure effect and recognition depend on the way you look!

In line with Whittlesea and Price (2001), we investigated whether the memory effect measured with an implicit memory paradigm (mere exposure effect) and an explicit recognition task depended on perceptual processing strategies, regardless of whether the task required intentional retrieval. We found that manipulation intended to prompt functional implicit-explicit dissociation no longer had a differential effect when we induced similar perceptual strategies in both tasks. Indeed, the results showed that prompting a nonanalytic strategy ensured performance above chance on both tasks. Conversely, inducing an analytic strategy drastically decreased both explicit and implicit performance. Furthermore, we noted that the nonanalytic strategy involved less extensive gaze scanning than the analytic strategy and that memory effects under this processing strategy were largely independent of gaze movement.

Holistic face processing can be independent of gaze behaviour: evidence from the composite face illusion

People tend to perceive identical top halves (i.e., above the nose) of two face stimuli as being different when they are aligned with distinct bottom halves. This composite face illusion is generally considered as the most compelling evidence that facial features are integrated into a holistic representation. Here, we recorded eye-movements during the composite face illusion in a delayed matching task of top halves of faces. Behavioural results showed a strong composite face effect, participants making more mistakes and taking longer time to match two identical top halves of faces when they were aligned (vs. misaligned) with different bottom halves. Importantly, fixation sites and eye-movements were virtually identical when the top and bottom parts were aligned (composite illusion) or misaligned (no illusion), indicating that holistic face processing can be independent of gaze behaviour. These findings reinforce the view that holistic representations of individual faces can be extracted early on from information at a relatively coarse scale, independently of overt attention.