An official website of the United States government
Holistic processing is inferred from a number of effects, many of which suggest that people generally find it difficult to process face parts independently. The study of holistic processing using faces has revealed many failures of convergence across different measures, as well as very poor reliability. New tasks designed for individual-differences measurement of holistic processing are more reliable. But other challenges to the study of individual differences in holistic processing require a different approach, in particular the use of nonface objects. Observers’ experiences with faces may be so extensive that it cannot be quantified. In addition, it is difficult to manipulate experience with faces to study causes and mechanisms underlying holistic effects. Recent work has combined an individual-differences approach with a parametric manipulation of experience to reveal that holistic processing arises from domain-specific experience. Other work has revealed that learned attention to parts is sufficient to result in holistic processing, consistent with a mechanism rooted in category-specific learned attention.
more »
« less
Domain-specific experience determines individual differences in holistic processing
Holistic processing refers to the processing of objects as wholes rather than in a piecemeal, part-based fashion. Despite a suggested link between expertise and holistic processing, the role of experience in determining holistic processing of both faces and objects has been questioned. Here, we combine an individual differences approach with an experimental training study and parametrically manipulate experience with novel objects to examine the determinants of holistic processing. We also measure object-recognition ability. Our results show that although domain-general visual ability is a predictor of the ability to match object parts, it is the amount of experience people have individuating objects of a category that determines the extent to which they process new objects of this category in a holistic manner. This work highlights the benefits of dissociating the influences of domain-general ability and domain-specific experience, typically confounded in measures of performance or “expertise.” Our findings are consistent with those in recent work with faces showing that variability specific to experience is a better predictor of domain-specific effects than is variability in performance. We argue that individual differences in holistic processing arise from domain-specific experience and that these effects are related to similar effects of experience on other measures of selective attention.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1640681
- PAR ID:
- 10201978
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of experimental psychology
- ISSN:
- 2329-8456
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)In recent work, the Vanderbilt Holistic Processing Tests for novel objects (VHPT-NOs), were used to show that holistic processing for artificial objects increased as a function of parametric variation of experience. Here, novices are tested on the VHPT-Nos to address two questions. First, does the test detect any level of holistic processing for novel objects in novices? Second, how is part matching performance on this test related to object recognition ability, as measured by the Novel Object Memory Test (NOMT)? In a high-powered study, we provide substantial evidence of no holistic processing on the VHPT-NO in novices, including for arguably facelike symmetrical Greebles. Evidence of no correlations between measures of holistic processing suggests that these indices can be considered free of influences from domain-general selective attention. In contrast, overall performance in part matching in the VHPT-NO shows shared variance across categories, which we postulate is related to object recognition. A second study provides direct evidence that part matching measures to a large extent the same ability as whole object learning on the NOMT. Our results suggest that any holistic processing measured in the VHPT-NOs will not be contaminated by domain-general effects and can be considered entirely due to experience with a category. The VHPT-NO will therefore be useful in further examination of how different aspects of experience contribute to the development of holistic processing.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)People can relatively easily report summary properties for ensembles of objects, suggesting that this information can enrich visual experience and increase the efficiency of perceptual processing. Here, we ask whether the ability to judge diversity within object arrays improves with experience. We surmised that ensemble judgments would be more accurate for commonly experienced objects, and perhaps even more for objects of expertise like faces. We also expected improvements in ensemble processing with practice with a novel category, and perhaps even more with repeated experience with specific exemplars. We compared the effect of experience on diversity judgments for arrays of objects, with participants being tested with either a small number of repeated exemplars or with a large number of exemplars from the same object category. To explore the role of more prolonged experience, we tested participants with completely novel objects (random-blobs), with objects familiar at the category level (cars), and with objects with which observers are experts at subordinate-level recognition (faces). For objects that are novel, participants showed evidence of improved ability to distribute attention. In contrast, for object categories with long-term experience, i.e., faces and cars, performance improved during the experiment but not necessarily due to improved ensemble processing. Practice with specific exemplars did not result in better diversity judgments for all object categories. Considered together, these results suggest that ensemble processing improves with experience. However, the role of experience is rapid, does not rely on exemplar-level knowledge and may not benefit from subordinate-level expertise.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)When objects from two categories of expertise (e.g., faces and cars in dual car/face experts) are processed simultaneously, competition occurs across a variety of tasks. Here, we investigate whether competition between face and car processing also occurs during ensemble coding. The relationship between single object recognition and ensemble coding is debated, but if ensemble coding relies on the same ability as object recognition, we expect cars to interfere with ensemble coding of faces as a function of car expertise. We measured the ability to judge the variability in identity of arrays of faces, in the presence of task irrelevant distractors (cars or novel objects). On each trial, participants viewed two sequential arrays containing four faces and four distractors, judging which array was the more diverse in terms of face identity. We measured participants’ car expertise, object recognition ability, and face recognition ability. Using Bayesian statistics, we found evidence against competition as a function of car expertise during ensemble coding of faces. Face recognition ability predicted ensemble judgments for faces, regardless of the category of task-irrelevant distractors. The result suggests that ensemble coding is not susceptible to competition between different domains of similar expertise, unlike single-object recognition.more » « less
-
Individual differences in expertise with non-face objects has been positively related to neural selectivity for these objects in several brain regions, including in the fusiform face area (FFA). Recently, we reported that FFA’s cortical thickness is also positively correlated with expertise for non-living objects, while FFA’s cortical thickness is negatively correlated with face recognition ability. These opposite relations between structure and visual abilities, obtained in the same subjects, were postulated to reflect the earlier experience with faces relative to cars, with different mechanisms of plasticity operating at these different developmental times. Here we predicted that variability for faces, presumably reflecting pruning, would be found selectively in deep cortical layers. In 13 men selected to vary in their performance with faces, we used ultra-high field imaging (7 Tesla), we localized the FFA functionally and collected and averaged 6 ultra-high resolution susceptibility weighed images (SWI). Voxel dimensions were 0.194x0.194x1.00mm, covering 20 slices with 0.1mm gap. Images were then processed by two operators blind to behavioral results to define the gray matter/white matter (deep) and gray matter/CSF (superficial) cortical boundaries. Internal boundaries between presumed deep, middle and superficial cortical layers were obtained with an automated method based on image intensities. We used an extensive battery of behavioral tests to quantify both face and object recognition ability. We replicate prior work with face and non-living object recognition predicting large and independent parts of the variance in cortical thickness of the right FFA, in different directions. We also find that face recognition is specifically predicted by the thickness of the deep cortical layers in FFA, whereas recognition of vehicles relates to the thickness of all cortical layers. Our results represent the most precise structural correlate of a behavioral ability to date, linking face recognition ability to a specific layer of a functionally-defined area.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000628
