Recent evidence indicates that observers' sensitivity to configural information in dynamic human action is disrupted when action is inverted, whereas sensitivity to featural action information is not. The current research involved two experiments that expand upon this basic finding. Experiment 1 revealed that featural and configural action information are processed similarly in static representations of action as in dynamic action. Experiment 2 indicated that configural processing is uniquely sensitive to orientation only in human action as compared to a similar control stimulus. These findings further support the idea that the perception of action recruits specialized orientation-specific configural processing, and parallel similar findings in face perception and visual expertise.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaldwinD, 2005“Discerning intentions: Characterizing the cognitive system at play”, in The Development of Social Cognition and Communication Eds HomerB DTamis-LeMondaC S, (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates)
2.
van BelleGde GraefPVerfaillieKRossionBLefèvreP, 2010“Face inversion impairs holistic perception: Evidence from gaze-contingent stimulation”Journal of Vision10(5):10, 1–13
3.
BentinSAllisonTPuceAPerezE, 1996“Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans”Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience8551–565
DiamondRCareyS, 1986“Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General115107–117
6.
FreireALeeKSymonsL A, 2000“The face-inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: Direct evidence”Perception29159–170
7.
GauthierITarrM J, 1997“Becoming a ‘greeble’ expert: Exploring mechanisms for face recognition”Vision Research371673–1682
8.
GauthierICurranTCurbyK MCollinsD, 2003“Perceptual interference supports a non-modular account of face processing”Nature Neuroscience6428–432
9.
GauthierISkudlarskiPGoreJ CAndersonA W, 2000“Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition”Nature Neuroscience3191–197
10.
GoffauxVHaultBVuongQ CRossionB, 2005“The respective role of low and high spatial frequencies in supporting configural and featural processing of faces”Perception3477–86
11.
Grill-SpectorKKnoufNKanwisherN, 2004“The fusiform face area subserves face perception, not generic within-category identification”Nature Neuroscience7555–562
12.
KanwisherNMcDermottJChunM M, 1997“The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception”Journal of Neuroscience174302–4311
13.
LederHCarbonC-C, 2006“Face-specific configural processing of relational information”British Journal of Psychology9719–29
14.
LoucksJBaldwinD, 2009“Sources of information for discriminating dynamic human actions”Cognition11184–97
15.
MaurerDLe GrandRMondlochC J, 2002“The many faces of configural processing”Trends in Cognitive Sciences6255–260
16.
MercureEDickFJohnsonM H, 2008“Featural and configural face processing differentially modulate ERP components”Brain Research1239162–170
17.
MondlochC JLe GrandRMaurerD, 2002“Configural face processing develops more slowly than featural face processing”Perception31553–566
18.
MorrisonD JSchynsP G, 2001“Usage of spatial scales for the categorization of faces, objects, and scenes”Psychonomic Bulletin & Review8454–469
19.
MurrayJ EYongERhodesG, 2000“Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces”Psychological Science11492–496
ReedC LStoneV EGrubbJ DMcGoldrickJ E, 2006“Turning configural processing upside down: Part and whole body postures”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance3273–87
22.
RossionB, 2008“Picture-plane inversion leads to qualitative changes of face perception”Acta Psychologica128274–289
23.
RossionBCurranTGauthierI, 2002a“A defense of the subordinate-level expertise account for the N170 component”Cognition85189–196
24.
RossionBGauthierIGoffauxVMarrM JCrommelinckM, 2002b“Expertise training with novel objects leads to left-lateralized facelike electrophysiological responses”Psychological Science13250–257
25.
ScottL SNelsonC A, 2006“Featural and configural face processing in adults and infants: A behavioral and electrophysiological investigation”Perception351107–1128
26.
TanakaJ WCurranT, 2001“A neural basis for expert object recognition”Psychological Science1243–47
27.
TanakaJ WFarahM J, 1993“Parts and whole in face recognition”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology46225–245
28.
XuY, 2005“Revisiting the role of the fusiform face area in visual expertise”Cerebral Cortex151234–1242
29.
YinR K, 1969“Looking at upside-down faces”Journal of Experimental Psychology81141–145
30.
YoungA WHellawellDHayD C, 1987“Configurational information in face perception”Perception16747–759
31.
YovelGKanwisherN, 2004“Face perception: Domain specific, not process specific”Neuron44889–898
32.
YovelGPelcTLubetzkyI, 2010“It's all in your head: Why is the body inversion effect abolished for headless bodies?”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance36759–767
