↓ Skip to main content

Adaptation Duration Dissociates Category-, Image-, and Person-Specific Processes on Face-Evoked Event-Related Potentials

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adaptation Duration Dissociates Category-, Image-, and Person-Specific Processes on Face-Evoked Event-Related Potentials
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01945
Pubmed ID
Authors

Márta Zimmer, Adriana Zbanţ, Kornél Németh, Gyula Kovács

Abstract

Several studies demonstrated that face perception is biased by the prior presentation of another face, a phenomenon termed as face-related after-effect (FAE). FAE is linked to a neural signal-reduction at occipito-temporal areas and it can be observed in the amplitude modulation of the early event-related potential (ERP) components. Recently, macaque single-cell recording studies suggested that manipulating the duration of the adaptor makes the selective adaptation of different visual motion processing steps possible. To date, however, only a few studies tested the effects of adaptor duration on the electrophysiological correlates of human face processing directly. The goal of the current study was to test the effect of adaptor duration on the image-, identity-, and generic category-specific face processing steps. To this end, in a two-alternative forced choice familiarity decision task we used five adaptor durations (ranging from 200-5000 ms) and four adaptor categories: adaptor and test were identical images-Repetition Suppression (RS); adaptor and test were different images of the Same Identity (SameID); adaptor and test images depicted Different Identities (DiffID); the adaptor was a Fourier phase-randomized image (No). Behaviorally, a strong priming effect was observed in both accuracy and response times for RS compared with both DiffID and No. The electrophysiological results suggest that rapid adaptation leads to a category-specific modulation of P100, N170, and N250. In addition, both identity and image-specific processes affected the N250 component during rapid adaptation. On the other hand, prolonged (5000 ms) adaptation enhanced, and extended category-specific adaptation processes over all tested ERP components. Additionally, prolonged adaptation led to the emergence of image-, and identity-specific modulations on the N170 and P2 components as well. In other words, there was a clear dissociation among category, identity-, and image-specific processing steps in the case of longer (3500 and 5000 ms) but not for shorter durations (< 3500 ms), reflected in the gradual reduction of N170 and enhancement of P2 in the No, DiffID, SameID, and RS conditions. Our findings imply that by manipulating adaptation duration one can dissociate the various steps of human face processing, reflected in the ERP response.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 28 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 31%
Student > Master 9 31%
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 72%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 December 2015.
All research outputs
#17,779,578
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,483
of 29,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265,340
of 390,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#322
of 418 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,825 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 418 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.