The role of configural information in gender categorisation was studied by aligning the top half of one face with the bottom half of another. The two faces had the same or different genders. Experiment l shows that participants were slower and made more errors in categorising the gender in either half of these composite faces when the two faces had a different gender, relative to control conditions where the two faces were nonaligned or had the same gender. This result parallels the composite effect for face recognition (Young et al, 1987 Perception16 747–759) and facial-expression recognition (Calder et al, 2000 Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance26 527–551). Similarly to responses to face identity and expression, the composite effect on gender discrimination was disrupted by inverting the faces (experiment 2). Both experiments also show that the composite paradigm is sensitive to general contextual interference in gender categorisation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BartlettJ CSearcyJ, 1993“Inversion and configuration of faces”Cognitive Psychology25281–316
2.
BrownEPerrettD I, 1993“What gives a face its gender?”Perception22829–840
3.
BruceVBurtonA MHannaEHealeyPMasonOCoombesAFrightRLinneyA, 1993“Sex discrimination: how do we tell the difference between male and female faces?”Perception22131–152
4.
BruceVLangtonS, 1994“The use of pigmentation and shading information in recognising the sex and identity of faces”Perception23803–822
5.
BruyerRGalvezCPrairialC, 1993“Effect of disorientation on visual analysis, familiarity decision and semantic decision on faces”British Journal of Psychology84433–441
6.
CalderA JYoungA WKeaneJDeanM, 2000“Configural information in facial expression perception”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance26527–551
7.
CampbellRBensonP JWallaceS BDoesberghSColemanM, 1999“More about brows: How poses that change brow position affect perceptions of gender”Perception28489–504
8.
CareySDiamondR, 1977“From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces”Science195312–314
9.
CareySDiamondRWoodB, 1980“The development of face recognition: A maturational component?”Developmental Psychology16257–269
10.
DavidoffJ B, 1986“The specificity of face perception: Evidence from psychological investigations”, in The Neuropsychology of Face Perception and Facial Expression Ed. BruyerR (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 147–166
11.
DavidoffJ BDonnellyN, 1990“Object superiority: A comparison of complete and part probes”Acta Psychologica73225–243
12.
EriksenB AEriksenC W, 1974“Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a non-search task”Perception & Psychophysics16143–149
13.
FlinR H, 1985“Development of face recognition: An encoding switch?”British Journal of Psychology76123–134
14.
HancockP JBruceVBurtonA M, 2000“Recognition of unfamiliar faces”Trends in Cognitive Sciences4330–337
15.
LederHBruceV, 1998“Local and relational aspects of face distinctiveness”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A51449–473
16.
LederHBruceV, 2000“When inverted faces are recognized: the role of configural information in face recognition”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A53513–536
17.
LederHCandrianGHuberOBruceV, 2001“Configural features in the context of upright and inverted faces”Perception3073–83
18.
LeeheySCareySDiamondRCahnA, 1978“Upright and inverted faces: The right hemisphere knows the difference”Cortex14411–419
19.
RakoverS S, 2002“Featural vs. configural information in faces: A conceptual and empirical analysis”British Journal of Psychology931–30
20.
RockI, 1974“The perception of disoriented figures”Scientific American230(1) 78–85
21.
SearcyJ HBartlettJ C, 1996“Inversion and processing of component and spatial-relational information in faces”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance22904–915
22.
TanakaJ WFarahM J, 1993“Parts and wholes in face recognition”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A46225–245
23.
ThompsonP, 1980“Margaret Thatcher: a new illusion”Perception9483–484
24.
ValentineT, 1988“Upside-down faces: A review of the effect of inversion upon face recognition”British Journal of Psychology79471–491
25.
ValentineT, 1991“A unified account of the effect of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A43161–204
26.
ValentineTBruceV, 1986“The effect of face, inversion and encoding activity upon face recognition”Acta Psychologica61259–273
27.
ValentineTBruceV, 1988“Mental rotation of face”Memory and Cognition16556–566
28.
YamaguchiM KHirukawaTKanazawaS, 1995“Judgment of gender through facial parts”Perception24563–575
29.
YinR K, 1969“Looking at upside-down faces”Journal of Experimental Psychology81141–145
30.
YinR K, 1970“Face recognition by brain-injured patients: A dissociable ability?”Neuropsychologia8395–402
31.
YoungA WHellawellD JHayD C, 1987“Configurational information in face perception”Perception16747–759
