Limits...
The complete design in the composite face paradigm: role of response bias, target certainty, and feedback.

Meinhardt G, Meinhardt-Injac B, Persike M - Front Hum Neurosci (2014)

Bottom Line: Some years ago an improved design (the "complete design") was proposed to assess the composite face effect in terms of a congruency effect, defined as the performance difference for congruent and incongruent target to no-target relationships (Cheung et al., 2008).In a recent paper Rossion (2013) questioned whether the congruency effect was a valid hallmark of perceptual integration, because it may contain confounds with face-unspecific interference effects.We conclude that the congruency effect, when complemented by an evaluation of response bias, is a valid hallmark of feature integration that allows one to separate faces from non-face objects.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Mainz, Germany.

ABSTRACT
Some years ago an improved design (the "complete design") was proposed to assess the composite face effect in terms of a congruency effect, defined as the performance difference for congruent and incongruent target to no-target relationships (Cheung et al., 2008). In a recent paper Rossion (2013) questioned whether the congruency effect was a valid hallmark of perceptual integration, because it may contain confounds with face-unspecific interference effects. Here we argue that the complete design is well-balanced and allows one to separate face-specific from face-unspecific effects. We used the complete design for a same/different composite stimulus matching task with face and non-face objects (watches). Subjects performed the task with and without trial-by-trial feedback, and with low and high certainty about the target half. Results showed large congruency effects for faces, particularly when subjects were informed late in the trial about which face halves had to be matched. Analysis of response bias revealed that subjects preferred the "different" response in incongruent trials, which is expected when upper and lower face halves are integrated perceptually at the encoding stage. The results pattern was observed in the absence of feedback, while providing feedback generally attenuated the congruency effect, and led to an avoidance of response bias. For watches no or marginal congruency effects and a moderate global "same" bias were observed. We conclude that the congruency effect, when complemented by an evaluation of response bias, is a valid hallmark of feature integration that allows one to separate faces from non-face objects.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Box-Whisker plots of congruency effects, CE = d′(CC) − d′(IC), for faces (open symbols) and watches (symbols filled with gray).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4215786&req=5

Figure 6: Box-Whisker plots of congruency effects, CE = d′(CC) − d′(IC), for faces (open symbols) and watches (symbols filled with gray).

Mentions: Figure 6 shows the congruency effects (CE) for faces (open symbols) and watches (filled symbols), as Box-Whisker plots2. A significant congruency effect in one condition, when the cue came at the second position in the absence of feedback, existed for watches [CE = 0.404, t(18) = 2.969, p = 0.008]. The lack of any interactions of congruency with cue position or feedback (see above) indicates that these factors did not modulate the congruency effect (see Table 2). Further, the analysis yielded no interaction of all three factors [feedback × cue position × congruency, F(1, 36) = 2.30, p = 0.138, η2p = 0.06].


The complete design in the composite face paradigm: role of response bias, target certainty, and feedback.

Meinhardt G, Meinhardt-Injac B, Persike M - Front Hum Neurosci (2014)

Box-Whisker plots of congruency effects, CE = d′(CC) − d′(IC), for faces (open symbols) and watches (symbols filled with gray).
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4215786&req=5

Figure 6: Box-Whisker plots of congruency effects, CE = d′(CC) − d′(IC), for faces (open symbols) and watches (symbols filled with gray).
Mentions: Figure 6 shows the congruency effects (CE) for faces (open symbols) and watches (filled symbols), as Box-Whisker plots2. A significant congruency effect in one condition, when the cue came at the second position in the absence of feedback, existed for watches [CE = 0.404, t(18) = 2.969, p = 0.008]. The lack of any interactions of congruency with cue position or feedback (see above) indicates that these factors did not modulate the congruency effect (see Table 2). Further, the analysis yielded no interaction of all three factors [feedback × cue position × congruency, F(1, 36) = 2.30, p = 0.138, η2p = 0.06].

Bottom Line: Some years ago an improved design (the "complete design") was proposed to assess the composite face effect in terms of a congruency effect, defined as the performance difference for congruent and incongruent target to no-target relationships (Cheung et al., 2008).In a recent paper Rossion (2013) questioned whether the congruency effect was a valid hallmark of perceptual integration, because it may contain confounds with face-unspecific interference effects.We conclude that the congruency effect, when complemented by an evaluation of response bias, is a valid hallmark of feature integration that allows one to separate faces from non-face objects.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz Mainz, Germany.

ABSTRACT
Some years ago an improved design (the "complete design") was proposed to assess the composite face effect in terms of a congruency effect, defined as the performance difference for congruent and incongruent target to no-target relationships (Cheung et al., 2008). In a recent paper Rossion (2013) questioned whether the congruency effect was a valid hallmark of perceptual integration, because it may contain confounds with face-unspecific interference effects. Here we argue that the complete design is well-balanced and allows one to separate face-specific from face-unspecific effects. We used the complete design for a same/different composite stimulus matching task with face and non-face objects (watches). Subjects performed the task with and without trial-by-trial feedback, and with low and high certainty about the target half. Results showed large congruency effects for faces, particularly when subjects were informed late in the trial about which face halves had to be matched. Analysis of response bias revealed that subjects preferred the "different" response in incongruent trials, which is expected when upper and lower face halves are integrated perceptually at the encoding stage. The results pattern was observed in the absence of feedback, while providing feedback generally attenuated the congruency effect, and led to an avoidance of response bias. For watches no or marginal congruency effects and a moderate global "same" bias were observed. We conclude that the congruency effect, when complemented by an evaluation of response bias, is a valid hallmark of feature integration that allows one to separate faces from non-face objects.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus