Limits...
Developmental changes in analytic and holistic processes in face perception.

Joseph JE, DiBartolo MD, Bhatt RS - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: Analytical processing was operationalized as the degree of parallel processing (or no change in RT as a function of greater similarity of features or spatial relations).Holistic processing was not evident in younger children.Hence, the development of holistic face representations relies on 2(nd) order processing initially then incorporates featural information by adulthood.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Neurosciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC USA.

ABSTRACT
Although infants demonstrate sensitivity to some kinds of perceptual information in faces, many face capacities continue to develop throughout childhood. One debate is the degree to which children perceive faces analytically versus holistically and how these processes undergo developmental change. In the present study, school-aged children and adults performed a perceptual matching task with upright and inverted face and house pairs that varied in similarity of featural or 2(nd) order configural information. Holistic processing was operationalized as the degree of serial processing when discriminating faces and houses [i.e., increased reaction time (RT), as more features or spacing relations were shared between stimuli]. Analytical processing was operationalized as the degree of parallel processing (or no change in RT as a function of greater similarity of features or spatial relations). Adults showed the most evidence for holistic processing (most strongly for 2(nd) order faces) and holistic processing was weaker for inverted faces and houses. Younger children (6-8 years), in contrast, showed analytical processing across all experimental manipulations. Older children (9-11 years) showed an intermediate pattern with a trend toward holistic processing of 2(nd) order faces like adults, but parallel processing in other experimental conditions like younger children. These findings indicate that holistic face representations emerge around 10 years of age. In adults both 2(nd) order and featural information are incorporated into holistic representations, whereas older children only incorporate 2(nd) order information. Holistic processing was not evident in younger children. Hence, the development of holistic face representations relies on 2(nd) order processing initially then incorporates featural information by adulthood.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Face and house matching logRT as a function of inversion, similarity, and age group for the 2nd order condition. (A) Results for upright faces. (B) Results for inverted faces. (C) Results for upright houses. (D) Results for inverted houses. In each panel, similarity functions for “different” trials are indicated as solid lines and filled symbols and similarity functions for “same” trials are indicated with dotted lines and hollow symbols. In a given panel, each age group’s similarity function is scaled to the same adjusted mean value in the sim0 condition. Error bars are not shown given the complexity of the graphs.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4528094&req=5

Figure 7: Face and house matching logRT as a function of inversion, similarity, and age group for the 2nd order condition. (A) Results for upright faces. (B) Results for inverted faces. (C) Results for upright houses. (D) Results for inverted houses. In each panel, similarity functions for “different” trials are indicated as solid lines and filled symbols and similarity functions for “same” trials are indicated with dotted lines and hollow symbols. In a given panel, each age group’s similarity function is scaled to the same adjusted mean value in the sim0 condition. Error bars are not shown given the complexity of the graphs.

Mentions: Figure 7 shows logRT as a function of similarity by age group and by each Category × Orientation condition for 2nd order configural stimuli. Younger children again show flatter similarity functions, or even negative-going patterns for some conditions, compared to older children and adults. Older children show functions that have similar slopes to adults across all conditions. The ANCOVAs revealed age group differences in RT functions only for upright stimuli. For upright faces, the Similarity × Age Group interaction was significant, F(4,118) = 3.3, p = 0.017, and the simple effect of similarity was significant for adults (p < 0.031) and older children (p < 0.013) but the linear trend was only significant in adults (p = 0.016). For upright houses, the Similarity × Age interaction was significant, F(4,118) = 9.0, p = 0.0001, but the simple effect of similarity was only marginally significant for older children (p = 0.053, no linear trend) and not significant for adults or younger children.


Developmental changes in analytic and holistic processes in face perception.

Joseph JE, DiBartolo MD, Bhatt RS - Front Psychol (2015)

Face and house matching logRT as a function of inversion, similarity, and age group for the 2nd order condition. (A) Results for upright faces. (B) Results for inverted faces. (C) Results for upright houses. (D) Results for inverted houses. In each panel, similarity functions for “different” trials are indicated as solid lines and filled symbols and similarity functions for “same” trials are indicated with dotted lines and hollow symbols. In a given panel, each age group’s similarity function is scaled to the same adjusted mean value in the sim0 condition. Error bars are not shown given the complexity of the graphs.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4528094&req=5

Figure 7: Face and house matching logRT as a function of inversion, similarity, and age group for the 2nd order condition. (A) Results for upright faces. (B) Results for inverted faces. (C) Results for upright houses. (D) Results for inverted houses. In each panel, similarity functions for “different” trials are indicated as solid lines and filled symbols and similarity functions for “same” trials are indicated with dotted lines and hollow symbols. In a given panel, each age group’s similarity function is scaled to the same adjusted mean value in the sim0 condition. Error bars are not shown given the complexity of the graphs.
Mentions: Figure 7 shows logRT as a function of similarity by age group and by each Category × Orientation condition for 2nd order configural stimuli. Younger children again show flatter similarity functions, or even negative-going patterns for some conditions, compared to older children and adults. Older children show functions that have similar slopes to adults across all conditions. The ANCOVAs revealed age group differences in RT functions only for upright stimuli. For upright faces, the Similarity × Age Group interaction was significant, F(4,118) = 3.3, p = 0.017, and the simple effect of similarity was significant for adults (p < 0.031) and older children (p < 0.013) but the linear trend was only significant in adults (p = 0.016). For upright houses, the Similarity × Age interaction was significant, F(4,118) = 9.0, p = 0.0001, but the simple effect of similarity was only marginally significant for older children (p = 0.053, no linear trend) and not significant for adults or younger children.

Bottom Line: Analytical processing was operationalized as the degree of parallel processing (or no change in RT as a function of greater similarity of features or spatial relations).Holistic processing was not evident in younger children.Hence, the development of holistic face representations relies on 2(nd) order processing initially then incorporates featural information by adulthood.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Neurosciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC USA.

ABSTRACT
Although infants demonstrate sensitivity to some kinds of perceptual information in faces, many face capacities continue to develop throughout childhood. One debate is the degree to which children perceive faces analytically versus holistically and how these processes undergo developmental change. In the present study, school-aged children and adults performed a perceptual matching task with upright and inverted face and house pairs that varied in similarity of featural or 2(nd) order configural information. Holistic processing was operationalized as the degree of serial processing when discriminating faces and houses [i.e., increased reaction time (RT), as more features or spacing relations were shared between stimuli]. Analytical processing was operationalized as the degree of parallel processing (or no change in RT as a function of greater similarity of features or spatial relations). Adults showed the most evidence for holistic processing (most strongly for 2(nd) order faces) and holistic processing was weaker for inverted faces and houses. Younger children (6-8 years), in contrast, showed analytical processing across all experimental manipulations. Older children (9-11 years) showed an intermediate pattern with a trend toward holistic processing of 2(nd) order faces like adults, but parallel processing in other experimental conditions like younger children. These findings indicate that holistic face representations emerge around 10 years of age. In adults both 2(nd) order and featural information are incorporated into holistic representations, whereas older children only incorporate 2(nd) order information. Holistic processing was not evident in younger children. Hence, the development of holistic face representations relies on 2(nd) order processing initially then incorporates featural information by adulthood.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus