Commentary: My face or yours? Event-related potential correlates of self-face processing

Subjectively salient faces differ from emotional faces: ERP evidence

The self-face is processed differently than emotional faces. A question arises whether other highly familiar and subjectively significant non-self faces (e.g. partner's face) are also differentiated from emotional faces. The aim of this event-related potential (ERP) study was to investigate the neural correlates of personally-relevant faces (the self and a close-other's) as well as emotionally positive (happy) and neutral faces. Participants were tasked with the simple detection of faces. Amplitudes of N170 were more negative in the right than in the left hemisphere and were not modulated by type of face. A similar pattern of N2 and P3 results for the self-face and close-other's face was observed: they were associated with decreased N2 and increased P3 relative to happy and neutral faces. However, the self-face was preferentially processed also when compared to a close-other's face as revealed by lower N2 and higher P3 amplitudes. Nonparametric cluster-based permutation tests showed an analogous pattern of results: significant clusters for the self-face compared with all other faces (close-other's, happy, neutral) and for close-other's face compared to happy and neutral faces. In summary, the self-face prioritization was observed, as indicated by significant differences between one's own face and all other faces. Crucially, both types of personally-relevant faces differed from happy faces. These findings point to the pivotal role of subjective evaluation of the saliency factor.

Cosmetic makeup enhances facial attractiveness and affective neural responses

Although it is well established that cosmetic makeup enhances perceived facial attractiveness, few studies have examined whether facial makeup modulates neural responses to face images. This study investigated behavioral and attractiveness-related brain responses to self-applied makeup, focusing on the N170, early posterior negativity, P300, and late positive potential components of event-related brain potentials. A total of 77 Japanese women participated in two experiments (N = 34 and 43 for Experiments 1 and 2, respectively). Experiment 1 assessed the effects of self-applied makeup on attractiveness-related event-related potential amplitudes using facial images during a makeup identification task in which makeup was directly relevant to task demands. Experiment 2 examined the effects of self-applied makeup using images of one’s own face and another female’s face when performing a gender classification task, where the presence of makeup had no explicit connection to facial gender classification. In both experiments, faces with makeup were rated as more attractive and elicited more negative early posterior negativity and more positive late positive potential components, regardless of the participant’s own face or another person’s face. These findings suggest that people are spontaneously motivated to pay visual attention to faces with makeup, which supports the idea that makeup adds reward value to the facial appearance of the human. Moreover, neural evidence empirically confirmed that the benefits of makeup are not just limited to how others see your face but also extend to how you see your own face.

A featural account for own-face processing? Looking for support from face inversion, composite face, and part-whole tasks

It is widely accepted that face perception relies on holistic processing. However, this holistic advantage is not always found in the processing of the own face. Our study aimed to explore the role of holistic and featural processing in the identification of the own face, using three standard, but largely independent measures of holistic face processing: the face inversion task, the composite face task, and the part-whole task. Participants were asked to identify their face, a friend’s face, and an unfamiliar face in three different experimental blocks: (a) inverted versus upright; (b) top and bottom halves of the face aligned versus misaligned; and (c) facial features presented in isolation versus whole foil face context. Inverting a face impaired its identification, regardless of the identity. However, alignment effects were only found when identifying a friend or an unfamiliar face. In addition, a stronger feature advantage (i.e., better recognition for isolated features compared to in a whole-face context) was observed for the own face compared to the friend and unfamiliar faces. Altogether, these findings suggest that the own face is processed in a more featural manner but also relies on holistic processing. This work also highlights the importance of taking into consideration that different holistic processing paradigms could tap different forms of holistic processing.

Are covered faces eye-catching for us? The impact of masks on attentional processing of self and other faces during the COVID-19 pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, we have been confronted with faces covered by surgical-like masks. This raises a question about how our brains process this kind of visual information. Thus, the aims of the current study were twofold: (1) to investigate the role of attention in the processing of different types of faces with masks, and (2) to test whether such partial information about faces is treated similarly to fully visible faces. Participants were tasked with the simple detection of self-, close-other's, and unknown faces with and without a mask; this task relies on attentional processes. Event-related potential (ERP) findings revealed a similar impact of surgical-like masks for all faces: the amplitudes of early (P100) and late (P300, LPP) attention-related components were higher for faces with masks than for fully visible faces. Amplitudes of N170 were similar for covered and fully visible faces, and sources of brain activity were located in the fusiform gyri in both cases. Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) revealed that irrespective of whether the algorithm was trained to discriminate three types of faces either with or without masks, it was able to effectively discriminate faces that were not presented in the training phase.

Impaired attentional bias toward one's own face in autism spectrum disorder: ERP evidence

Converging lines of evidence seem to indicate reduced self-referential processing in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, processing of one's own face has rarely been investigated in the context of ASD. Thus, the aim of the present study was to elucidate the role of attentional biases in the processing of self- and other faces in ASD. To achieve this goal we presented participants with images of their own face, the face of a close-other, and famous and unknown faces in a Stroop-like paradigm. Participants (22 with ASD, 22 typically developing [TD]) were instructed to indicate the color of presented faces while EEG was recorded. Our event-related potential results clearly showed that self-face was associated with larger P3 amplitudes than all other faces in the TD group, thus indicating a strong attentional bias toward one's own face. In the ASD group, P3 to the self-face and the close-other's face did not differ, suggesting similar attentional biases in both cases. In line with these P3 findings, nonparametric cluster-based permutation tests showed an analogous pattern of results: significant clusters for the self-face compared with all other faces in the TD group, and no significant cluster in the ASD group. Overall, our findings revealed impaired attentional bias to one's own face and diminished self versus other differentiation in individuals with ASD. The similar neural underpinnings of the self-face and other faces supports previous findings indicating reduced self-prioritization among individuals with ASD.

The upside-down self: One's own face recognition is affected by inversion

One's own face is recognized more efficiently than any other face, although the neural mechanisms underlying this phenomenon remain poorly understood. Considering the extensive visual experience that we have with our own face, some authors have proposed that self-face recognition involves a more analytical perceptual strategy (i.e., based on face features) than other familiar faces, which are commonly processed holistically (i.e., as a whole). However, this hypothesis has not yet been tested with brain activity data. In the present study, we employed an inversion paradigm combined with event-related potential (ERP) recordings to investigate whether the self-face is processed more analytically. Sixteen healthy participants were asked to identify their own face and a familiar face regardless of its orientation, which could either be upright or inverted. ERP analysis revealed an enhanced amplitude and a delayed latency for the N170 component when faces were presented in an inverted orientation. Critically, both the self and a familiar face were equally vulnerable to the inversion effect, suggesting that the self-face is not processed more analytically than a familiar face. In addition, we replicated the recent finding that the attention-related P200 component is a specific neural index of self-face recognition. Overall, our results suggest that the advantage for self-face processing might be better explained by the engagement of self-related attentional mechanisms than by the use of a more analytical visuoperceptual strategy.

Self-face and emotional faces-are they alike?

The image of one’s own face is a particularly distinctive feature of the self. The self-face differs from other faces not only in respect of its familiarity but also in respect of its subjective emotional significance and saliency. The current study aimed at elucidating similarities/dissimilarities between processing of one’s own face and emotional faces: happy faces (based on the self-positive bias) and fearful faces (because of their high perceptual saliency, a feature shared with self-face). Electroencephalogram data were collected in the group of 30 participants who performed a simple detection task. Event-related potential analyses indicated significantly increased P3 and late positive potential amplitudes to the self-face in comparison to all other faces: fearful, happy and neutral. Permutation tests confirmed the differences between the self-face and all three types of other faces for numerous electrode sites and in broad time windows. Representational similarity analysis, in turn, revealed distinct processing of the self-face and did not provide any evidence in favour of similarities between the self-face and emotional (either negative or positive) faces. These findings strongly suggest that the self-face processing do not resemble those of emotional faces, thus implying that prioritized self-referential processing is driven by the subjective relevance of one’s own face.

Multisensory stimulation modulates perceptual and post perceptual face representations: Evidence from event-related potentials

Seeing a face being touched in spatial and temporal synchrony with the own face produces a bias in self-recognition, whereby the other face becomes more likely to be perceived as the self. The present study employed event-related potentials to explore whether this enfacement effect reflects initial face encoding, enhanced distinctiveness of the enfaced face, modified self-identity representations, or even later processing stages that are associated with the emotional processing of faces. Participants were stroked in synchrony or asynchrony with an unfamiliar face they observed on a monitor in front of them, in a situation approximating a mirror image. Subsequently, event-related potentials were recorded during the presentation of (a) a previously synchronously stimulated face, (b) an asynchronously stimulated face, (c) observers' own face, (d) filler faces, and (e) a to-be-detected target face, which required a response. Observers reported a consistent enfacement illusion after synchronous stimulation. Importantly, the synchronously stimulated face elicited more prominent N170 and P200 responses than the asynchronously stimulated face. By contrast, similar N250 and P300 responses were observed in these conditions. These results suggest that enfacement modulates early neural correlates of face encoding and facial prototypicality, rather than identity self-representations and associated emotional processes.