In recognising a face the visual system shows a remarkable ability in overcoming changes in viewpoint. However, the mechanisms involved in solving this complex computational problem, particularly in terms of information processing, have not been clearly defined. Considerable evidence indicates that face recognition involves both featural and configural processing. In this study we examined the contribution of featural information across viewpoint change. Participants were familiarised with unknown faces and were later tested for recognition in complete or part-face format, across changes in view. A striking effect of viewpoint resulting in a reduction in profile recognition compared with the three-quarter and frontal views was found. However, a complete-face over part-face advantage independent of transformation was demonstrated across all views. A hierarchy of feature salience was also demonstrated. Findings are discussed in terms of the problem of object constancy as it applies to faces.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrajeW L, 2003“Illumination encoding in face recognition: Effect of position shift”Journal of Vision3161–170.
2.
BrédartS., 2003“Recognising the usual orientation of one's own face: The role of asymmetrically located details”Perception32805–811.
3.
BruceV., 1982“Changing faces: Visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition”British Journal of Psychology73105–116.
4.
BruceV.ValentineT.BaddeleyA., 1987“The basis of the 3/4 view advantage in face recognition”Applied Cognitive Psychology1109–120.
5.
BruceV.YoungA., 1986“Understanding face recognition”British Journal of Psychology77305–327.
6.
BurtonA MBruceV.HancockP J B, 1999“From pixels to people: A model of familiar face recognition”Cognitive Science231–31.
7.
CabezaR.KatoT., 2000“Features are also important: Contributions of featural and configural processing to face recognition”Psychological Science11429–433.
8.
ChungM SThomsonD M, 1995“Development of face recognition”British Journal of Psychology8655–87.
9.
CollishawS MHoleG J, 2000“Featural and configurational processes in the recognition of faces of different familiarity”Perception29893–909.
10.
CollishawS MHoleG J, 2002“Is there a linear or a nonlinear relationship between rotation and configural processing of faces?”Perception31287–296.
11.
DiamondR.CareyS., 1986“Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General115107–117.
12.
FraserI HCraigG LParkerD M, 1990“Reaction time measures of feature saliency in schematic faces”Perception19661–673.
13.
FreireA.LeeK.SymonsL A, 2000“The face-inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: Direct evidence”Perception29159–170.
14.
GoldJ.BennettP JSekulerA B, 1999“Identification of band-pass filtered letters and faces by human ideal observers”Vision Research393537–3560.
15.
GosselinF.SchynsP G, 2001“Bubbles: A technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks”Vision Research412261–2271.
16.
GosselinF.SchynsP G, 2002“RAP a new framework for visual categorization”Trends in Cognitive Sciences670–77.
17.
HaigN D, 1985“How faces differ—a new comparative technique”Perception14601–615.
18.
HaigN D, 1986“Exploring recognition with interchanged facial features”Perception15235–247.
19.
HaxbyJ VHoffmanE AGobbiniM I, 2000“The distributed human neural system for face perception”Trends in Cognitive Sciences4223–233.
20.
HaxbyJ VHoffmanE AGobbiniM I, 2002“Human neural systems for face recognition and social communication”Biological Psychiatry5159–67.
21.
HillH.SchynsP GAkamatsuS., 1997“Information and viewpoint dependence in face recognition”Cognition62201–222.
22.
HoleG J, 1994“Configurational factors in the perception of unfamiliar faces”Perception2365–74.
23.
KrouseF L, 1981“Effects of pose, pose change, and delay on face recognition performance”Journal of Applied Psychology66651–654.
24.
LacroceS MBrosgoleL.StanfordG R, 1993“Discriminability of different parts of faces”Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society31329–331.
25.
LaengB.RouwR., 2001“Canonical views of faces and the cerebral hemispheres”Laterality6193–224.
26.
LederH.BruceV., 2000“When inverted faces are recognized: The role of configural information in face recognition”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology53513–536.
27.
LederH.CandrianG.HuberO.BruceV., 2001“Configural features in the context of upright and inverted faces”Perception3073–83.
28.
LernerY.HendlerT.MalachR., 2002“Object-completion effects in the human lateral occipital complex”Cerebral Cortex12163–177.
29.
LiuC HChaudhuriA., 2002“Reassessing the 3/4 view effect in face recognition”Cognition8331–48.
30.
LogieR HBaddeleyA DWoodheadM M, 1987“Face recognition, pose and ecological validity”Applied Cognitive Psychology153–69.
31.
MachoS.LederH., 1998“Your eyes only? A test of interactive influence in the processing of facial features”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance241486–1500.
32.
MosesY.UllmanS.EdelmanS., 1996“Generalization to novel images in upright and inverted faces”Perception25443–461.
33.
NewellF NChiroroP.ValentineT., 1999“Recognizing unfamiliar faces: The effect of distinctiveness and view”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A52509–534.
34.
O'TooleA JEdelmanS.BülthoffH H, 1998“Stimulus-specific effects in face recognition over changes in viewpoint”Vision Research382351–2363.
35.
PattersonK.BaddeleyA., 1977“When face recognition fails”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory3406–417.
36.
RakoverS.TeucherB., 1997“Face inversion effects: Parts and whole relationship”Perception & Psychophysics59252–261.
37.
RisticJ.FriesenC KKingstoneA., 2002“Are eyes special? It depends on how you look at it”Psychonomic Bulletin & Review9507–513.
38.
SadrJ.JarudiI.SinhaP., 2003“The role of eyebrows in face recognition”Perception32285–293.
39.
SchynsP G, 1998“Diagnostic recognition: Task constraints, object information, and their interactions”Cognition67147–179.
40.
SchynsP GBonnarL.GosselinF., 2002“Show me the features! Understanding recognition from the use of visual information”Psychological Science13402–409.
41.
SchynsP GBülthoffH H, 1994“Viewpoint dependence and face recognition”Proceedings of the XVI Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 789–793.
42.
SekulerA BGasparC MGoldJ MBennettP J, 2004“Inversion leads to quantitative, not qualitative, changes in face processing”Current Biology14391–396.
43.
SieroffE., 2001“Feature processing and superiority of three-quarter views in face recognition”Brain Cognition46272–276.
44.
ShepherdJ WDaviesG MEllisA W, 1981“Studies of cue saliency”, in Perceiving and Remembering Faces Eds DavisG.EllisH.ShepherdJ. (New York: Academic Press) pp 105–131.
45.
TjanB SBrajeW LLeggeG EKerstenD., 1995“Human efficiency for recognizing 3-D objects in luminance noise”Vision Research353053–3069.
46.
TrojeN.BülthoffH H, 1996“Face recognition under varying poses: The role of texture and shape”Vision Research361761–1771.
47.
TrojeN FKerstenD., 1999“Viewpoint-dependent recognition of familiar faces”Perception28483–487.
48.
UllmanS., 1998“Three-dimensional object recognition based on the combination of views”Cognition6721–44.
49.
ValentinD.AbdiH.EdelmanB., 1997“What represents a face? A computational approach for the integration of physiological and psychological data”Perception261271–1288.
50.
ValentinD.AbdiH.EdelmanB., 1999“From rotation to disfiguration: Testing a dual-strategy model for recognition of faces across view angles”Perception28817–824.
