Limits...
Famous faces demand attention due to reduced inhibitory processing.

Machado L, Guiney H, Mitchell A - PLoS ONE (2011)

Bottom Line: We used a focused attention paradigm that tracks the influence of a distractor over time and provides a measure of inhibitory processing.The results revealed that although all of the stimuli elicited similar levels of distraction, only inverted distractor faces and non-face objects elicited inhibitory effects.The lack of inhibitory effects for upright famous faces provides novel evidence that reduced inhibitory processing underlies the mandatory nature of face processing.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology and Brain Health Research Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. liana@psy.otago.ac.nz

ABSTRACT
People have particular difficulty ignoring distractors that depict faces. This phenomenon has been attributed to the high level of biological significance that faces carry. The current study aimed to elucidate the mechanism by which faces gain processing priority. We used a focused attention paradigm that tracks the influence of a distractor over time and provides a measure of inhibitory processing. Upright famous faces served as test stimuli and inverted versions of the faces as well as upright non-face objects served as control stimuli. The results revealed that although all of the stimuli elicited similar levels of distraction, only inverted distractor faces and non-face objects elicited inhibitory effects. The lack of inhibitory effects for upright famous faces provides novel evidence that reduced inhibitory processing underlies the mandatory nature of face processing.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

For each version (non-face objects, upright faces, and inverted faces), the size of the compatibility effect in milliseconds for each distractor-target SOA.The compatibility effect equals response latencies on incompatible trials minus response latencies on compatible trials.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3105087&req=5

pone-0020544-g002: For each version (non-face objects, upright faces, and inverted faces), the size of the compatibility effect in milliseconds for each distractor-target SOA.The compatibility effect equals response latencies on incompatible trials minus response latencies on compatible trials.

Mentions: An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted on the median reaction times (RTs) of the correct responses and the error rates with distractor-target SOA (50, 350, 650, or 950 ms) and distractor-target compatibility as within-subjects factors. Table 1 and Figure 2 summarize the data for non-face objects, upright faces, and inverted faces.


Famous faces demand attention due to reduced inhibitory processing.

Machado L, Guiney H, Mitchell A - PLoS ONE (2011)

For each version (non-face objects, upright faces, and inverted faces), the size of the compatibility effect in milliseconds for each distractor-target SOA.The compatibility effect equals response latencies on incompatible trials minus response latencies on compatible trials.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3105087&req=5

pone-0020544-g002: For each version (non-face objects, upright faces, and inverted faces), the size of the compatibility effect in milliseconds for each distractor-target SOA.The compatibility effect equals response latencies on incompatible trials minus response latencies on compatible trials.
Mentions: An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted on the median reaction times (RTs) of the correct responses and the error rates with distractor-target SOA (50, 350, 650, or 950 ms) and distractor-target compatibility as within-subjects factors. Table 1 and Figure 2 summarize the data for non-face objects, upright faces, and inverted faces.

Bottom Line: We used a focused attention paradigm that tracks the influence of a distractor over time and provides a measure of inhibitory processing.The results revealed that although all of the stimuli elicited similar levels of distraction, only inverted distractor faces and non-face objects elicited inhibitory effects.The lack of inhibitory effects for upright famous faces provides novel evidence that reduced inhibitory processing underlies the mandatory nature of face processing.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology and Brain Health Research Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. liana@psy.otago.ac.nz

ABSTRACT
People have particular difficulty ignoring distractors that depict faces. This phenomenon has been attributed to the high level of biological significance that faces carry. The current study aimed to elucidate the mechanism by which faces gain processing priority. We used a focused attention paradigm that tracks the influence of a distractor over time and provides a measure of inhibitory processing. Upright famous faces served as test stimuli and inverted versions of the faces as well as upright non-face objects served as control stimuli. The results revealed that although all of the stimuli elicited similar levels of distraction, only inverted distractor faces and non-face objects elicited inhibitory effects. The lack of inhibitory effects for upright famous faces provides novel evidence that reduced inhibitory processing underlies the mandatory nature of face processing.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus