The composite face effect (CFE) provides evidence for holistic face processing by demonstrating that when halves of different faces are aligned to resemble a single face, recognition of the component identities is disrupted. However, if the face halves are misaligned, the component identities become easier to recognise. While the horizontal CFE – wherein the top and bottom halves of the face are aligned – has been extensively studied, the existence of a vertical CFE – involving the combination of left-right face halves – remains unclear. This study investigated the vertical CFE using composite stimuli created by pairing familiar and unfamiliar faces. Participants made familiarity judgements for aligned and misaligned vertical and horizontal composites. Familiarity judgements were made more accurately and with faster response times with misaligned compared to aligned composites. The magnitude of the vertical CFE was comparable to the horizontal CFE and was unaffected by identity priming or which half of the face was attended. However, the size of the CFE was reduced when attention was not directed to a specific face half. These findings suggest that both the vertical and horizontal CFE reflect a common mechanism for integrating facial information across the visual field, underscoring holistic processing as a fundamental process in face recognition.
BoremanseA.NorciaA. M.RossionB. (2013). An objective signature for visual binding of face parts in the human brain. Journal of Vision, 13(11), 6–6. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.11.6
4.
BourneV. J.HoleG. J. (2006). Lateralized repetition priming for familiar faces: Evidence for asymmetric interhemispheric cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(6), 1117–1133.
5.
BoutetI.NelsonE. A.WatierN.CousineauD.BélandS.CollinC. A. (2021). Different measures of holistic face processing tap into distinct but partially overlapping mechanisms. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83, 2905–2923. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02337-7
6.
BradshawJ. L.NettletonN. C. (1981). The nature of hemispheric specialization in man. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00007548
BruceV.YoungA. W. (2012). Face perception. Psychology Press.
9.
CalderA. J.YoungA. W.KeaneJ.DeanM. (2000). Configural information in facial expression perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(2), 527. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.26.2.527
10.
ChenW.RenN.YoungA. W.LiuC. H. (2018). Interaction between social categories in the composite face paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(1), 34. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000418
11.
DakinS. C.WattR. J. (2009). Biological “bar codes” in human faces. Journal of Vision, 9(4), 2–2. https://doi.org/10.1167/9.4.2
12.
Davies-ThompsonJ.AndrewsT. J. (2012). Intra-and interhemispheric connectivity between face-selective regions in the human brain. Journal of Neurophysiology, 108(11), 3087–3095. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01171.2011
13.
DeBruineL.JonesB. (2017). Face Research Lab London Set. (Figshare 5047666; Version V5) [Data set]. Figshare.
14.
EllisA. W.YoungA. W.FludeB. M.HayD. C. (1987). Repetition priming of face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39(2), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748708401784
15.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
16.
FitousiD. (2020). Decomposing the composite face effect: Evidence for non-holistic processing based on the ex-Gaussian distribution. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73(6), 819–840. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021820904222
17.
FrässleS.KrachS.PaulusF. M.JansenA. (2016a). Handedness is related to neural mechanisms underlying hemispheric lateralization of face processing. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 27153. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep27153
18.
FrässleS.PaulusF. M.KrachS.SchweinbergerS. R.StephanK. E.JansenA. (2016b). Mechanisms of hemispheric lateralization: Asymmetric interhemispheric recruitment in the face perception network. Neuroimage, 124, 977–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.09.055
GeigerM. J.O'Gorman TuuraR.KlaverP. (2016). Inter-hemispheric connectivity in the fusiform gyrus supports memory consolidation for faces. European Journal of Neuroscience, 43(9), 1137–1145. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.13197
21.
GoffauxV.DakinS. C. (2010). Horizontal information drives the behavioral signatures of face processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 143.
22.
HarrisonM. T.StrotherL. (2020). Does right hemisphere superiority sufficiently explain the left visual field advantage in face recognition?Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82, 1205–1220. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01896-0
23.
HoleG. J. (1994). Configurational factors in the perception of unfamiliar faces. Perception, 23(1), 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1068/p230065
HsiaoJ. H. W.ShiehD. X.CottrellG. W. (2008). Convergence of the visual field split: Hemispheric modeling of face and object recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(12), 2298–2307. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20162
26.
JenkinsR.LavieN.DriverJ. (2003). Ignoring famous faces: Category-specific dilution of distractor interference. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(2), 298–309. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194801
27.
JinH.JiL.CheungO. S.HaywardW. G. (2024). Facilitation and interference are asymmetric in holistic face processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 31, 2214–2222. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02481-9
28.
JohnstonR. A.EdmondsA. J. (2009). Familiar and unfamiliar face recognition: A review. Memory (Hove, England), 17(5), 577–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210902976969
KampsF. S.MorrisE. J.DilksD. D. (2019). A face is more than just the eyes, nose, and mouth: FMRI evidence that face-selective cortex represents external features. Neuroimage, 184, 90–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.09.027
31.
LaguesseR.RossionB. (2013). Face perception is whole or none: Disentangling the role of spatial contiguity and interfeature distances in the composite face illusion. Perception, 42(10), 1013–1026. https://doi.org/10.1068/p7534
32.
LavieN.RoT.RussellC. (2003). The role of perceptual load in processing distractor faces. Psychological Science, 14(5), 510–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.03453
33.
LiJ.HuangL.SongY.LiuJ. (2017). Dissociated neural basis of two behavioral hallmarks of holistic face processing: The whole-part effect and composite-face effect. Neuropsychologia, 102, 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.05.026
34.
LiJ.SongY.LiuJ. (2019). Functional connectivity pattern in the core face network reflects different mechanisms of holistic face processing measured by the whole-part effect and composite-face effect. Neuroscience, 408, 248–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2019.04.017
35.
LiesefeldH. R.FuX.ZimmerH. D. (2015). Fast and careless or careful and slow? Apparent holistic processing in mental rotation is explained by speed-accuracy trade-offs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(4), 1140. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000081
36.
LiesefeldH. R.JanczykM. (2019). Combining speed and accuracy to control for speed-accuracy trade-offs (?Behavior Research Methods, 51, 40–60. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1076-x
37.
LiuT. T.BehrmannM. (2014). Impaired holistic processing of left-right composite faces in congenital prosopagnosia. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 750.
38.
LiuJ.HarrisA.KanwisherN. (2010). Perception of face parts and face configurations: An fMRI study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(1), 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2009.21203
39.
LiuT. T.HaywardW. G.OxnerM.BehrmannM. (2014). Holistic processing for left–right composite faces in Chinese and Caucasian observers. Visual Cognition, 22(8), 1050–1071. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2014.944613
40.
MaD. S.KantnerJ.WittenbrinkB. (2021). Chicago face database: Multiracial expansion. Behavior Research Methods, 53, 1289–1300. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01482-5
41.
McKelvieS. J. (1976). The role of eyes and mouth in the memory of a face. The American Journal of Psychology, 89, 311–323. https://doi.org/10.2307/1421414
PalermoR.RivoltaD.WilsonC. E.JefferyL. (2011). Adaptive face space coding in congenital prosopagnosia: Typical figural aftereffects but abnormal identity aftereffects. Neuropsychologia, 49(14), 3801–3812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.09.039
48.
PetersonM. F.EcksteinM. P. (2012). Looking just below the eyes is optimal across face recognition tasks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(48), E3314–E3323. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1214269109
49.
PetersonM. F.EcksteinM. P. (2013). Individual differences in eye movements during face identification reflect observer-specific optimal points of fixation. Psychological Science, 24(7), 1216–1225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612471684
50.
PosnerM. I.NissenM. J.OgdenW. C. (2014). Attended and unattended processing modes: The role of set for spatial location 1. In PickH. L.SaltzmanI. J. (Eds.), Modes of perceiving and processing information (pp. 137–157). Psychology Press.
QuinnB. P. A.WatsonD. M.NoadK.AndrewsT. J. (2024). Idiosyncratic patterns of interhemispheric connectivity in the face and scene networks of the human brain. Imaging Neuroscience, 2, 1–20.
53.
QuinnB. P.WieseH. (2023). The role of the eye region for familiar face recognition: Evidence from spatial low-pass filtering and contrast negation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 76(2), 338–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218221085990
54.
ReinitzM. T.MorrisseyJ.DembJ. (1994). Role of attention in face encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(1), 161. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.1.161
55.
RichlerJ. J.GauthierI. (2013). When intuition fails to align with data: A reply to Rossion (2013). Visual Cognition, 21(2), 254–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2013.796035
56.
RichlerJ. J.GauthierI. (2014). A meta-analysis and review of holistic face processing. Psychological Bulletin, 140(5), 1281–1302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037004
57.
RichlerJ. J.GauthierI.WengerM. J.PalmeriT. J. (2008a). Holistic processing of faces: Perceptual and decisional components. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(2), 328. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.328
58.
RichlerJ. J.MackM. L.GauthierI.PalmeriT. J. (2009). Holistic processing of faces happens at a glance. Vision Research, 49(23), 2856–2861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2009.08.025
59.
RichlerJ. J.TanakaJ. W.BrownD. D.GauthierI. (2008b). Why does selective attention to parts fail in face processing?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(6), 1356. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013080
RobertsT.BruceV. (1989). Repetition priming of face recognition in a serial choice reaction-time task. British Journal of Psychology, 80(2), 201–211.
62.
RossionB. (2013). The composite face illusion: A whole window into our understanding of holistic face perception. Visual Cognition, 21(2), 139–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2013.772929
63.
RossionB. (2014). Understanding face perception by means of prosopagnosia and neuroimaging. Frontiers in Bioscience, 6(258), 258–307. https://doi.org/10.2741/e706
64.
RossionB.BoremanseA. (2008). Nonlinear relationship between holistic processing of individual faces and picture-plane rotation: Evidence from the face composite illusion. Journal of Vision, 8(4), 3–3. https://doi.org/10.1167/8.4.3
65.
RossionB.DricotL.DevolderA.BodartJ. M.CrommelinckM.De GelderB.ZoontjesR. (2000). Hemispheric asymmetries for whole-based and part-based face processing in the human fusiform gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(5), 793–802. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892900562606
66.
RoyerJ.BlaisC.CharbonneauI.DéryK.TardifJ.DuchaineB.FisetD. (2018). Greater reliance on the eye region predicts better face recognition ability. Cognition, 181, 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.08.004
67.
SchiltzC.DricotL.GoebelR.RossionB. (2010). Holistic perception of individual faces in the right middle fusiform gyrus as evidenced by the composite face illusion. Journal of Vision, 10(2), 25–25. https://doi.org/10.1167/10.2.25
SeeckM.MichelC. M.MainwaringN.CosgroveR.BlumeH.IvesJ.SchomerD. L. (1997). Evidence for rapid face recognition from human scalp and intracranial electrodes. Neuroreport, 8(12), 2749–2754. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001756-199708180-00021
71.
ShiffrinR. M. (1988). Attention. In AtkinsonR. C.HerrnsteinR. J.LindzeyG.LuceR. D. (Eds.), Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology: Perception and motivation; learning and cognition (2nd ed., pp. 739–811). John Wiley & Sons.
72.
StrathieA.McNeillA.WhiteD. (2012). In the dock: Chimeric image composites reduce identification accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1806
73.
TanakaJ. W.CurranT.PorterfieldA. L.CollinsD. (2006). Activation of preexisting and acquired face representations: The N250 event-related potential as an index of face familiarity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(9), 1488–1497. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2006.18.9.1488
74.
TanakaJ. W.FarahM. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 46(2), 225–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749308401045
75.
TanakaJ. W.GordonI. (2011). Features, configuration, and holistic face processing. In CalderAndrew J. & (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Face Perception (pp. 177–194). Oxford Library of Psychology.
76.
TanakaJ. W.KaiserM. D.ButlerS.Le GrandR. (2012). Mixed emotions: Holistic and analytic perception of facial expressions. Cognition and Emotion, 26(6), 961–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2011.630933
77.
TaubertJ.AlaisD. (2009). The composite illusion requires composite face stimuli to be biologically plausible. Vision Research, 49(14), 1877–1885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2009.04.025
78.
TongF.NakayamaK.MoscovitchM.WeinribO.KanwisherN. (2000). Response properties of the human fusiform face area. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 17(1-3), 257–280.
79.
VenturaP.BulajićA.WongA. C. N.LeiteI.HermensF.PereiraA.LachmannT. (2021). Face and word composite effects are similarly affected by priming of local and global processing. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83, 2189–2204. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02287-0
80.
VeroskyS. C.Turk-BrowneN. B. (2012). Representations of facial identity in the left hemisphere require right hemisphere processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(4), 1006–1017.
81.
VieiraT. F.BottinoA.LaurentiniA.De SimoneM. (2014). Detecting siblings in image pairs. The Visual Computer, 30, 1333–1345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-013-0884-3
82.
Walker-SmithG. J.GaleA. G.FindlayJ. M. (2013). Eye movement strategies involved in face perception. Perception, 42(11), 1120–1133. https://doi.org/10.1068/p060313n
83.
WangZ.NiH.ZhouX.YangX.ZhengZ.SunY. H. P.JinH. (2023). Looking at the upper facial half enlarges the range of holistic face processing. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 2419. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-29583-z
84.
WangZ.QuinnP. C.JinH.SunY. H. P.TanakaJ. W.PascalisO.LeeK. (2019). A regional composite-face effect for species-specific recognition: Upper and lower halves play different roles in holistic processing of monkey faces. Vision Research, 157, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2018.03.004
85.
YanX.YoungA. W.AndrewsT. J. (2017). The automaticity of face perception is influenced by familiarity. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79, 2202–2211. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1362-1
YoungA. W.HellawellD.HayD. C. (1987). Configurational information in face perception. Perception, 16(6), 747–759. https://doi.org/10.1068/p160747
89.
ZhangJ.LiX.SongY.LiuJ. (2012). The fusiform face area is engaged in holistic, not parts-based, representation of faces. PloS one, 7(7), e40390.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
