Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Current views on face perception assume that the visual system receives only visual facial signals. However, I show that the visual perception of faces is systematically biased by adaptation to a haptically explored face. Recently, face aftereffects (FAEs; the altered perception of faces after adaptation to a face) have been demonstrated not only in visual perception but also in haptic perception; therefore, I combined the two FAEs to examine whether the visual system receives face-related signals from the haptic modality. I found that adaptation to a haptically explored facial expression on a face mask produced a visual FAE for facial expression. This cross-modal FAE was not due to explicitly imaging a face, response bias, or adaptation to local features. Furthermore, FAEs transferred from vision to haptics. These results indicate that visual face processing depends on substrates adapted by haptic faces, which suggests that face processing relies on shared representation underlying cross-modal interactions.

Keywords

face processing cross-modal interaction adaptation face perception cognitive neuroscience

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adams

W. J.

Gray

K. L.

Garner

Graf

E. W.

(2010). High-level face adaptation without awareness. Psychological Science, 21, 205–210.

Afraz

S. R.

Cavanagh

(2008). Retinotopy of the face aftereffect. Vision Research, 48, 42–54.

Anderson

N. D.

Wilson

H. R.

(2005). The nature of synthetic face adaptation. Vision Research, 45, 1815–1828.

Calder

A. J.

Rhodes

Johnson

M. H.

Haxby

J. V.

(2011). The Oxford handbook of face perception. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Casey

S. J.

Newell

F. N.

(2007). Are representations of unfamiliar faces independent of encoding modality? Neuropsychologia, 45, 506–513.

de Gelder

Vroomen

(2000). The perception of emotions by ear and by eye. Cognition & Emotion, 14, 289–311.

Dopjans

Bülthoff

H. H.

Wallraven

(2012). Serial exploration of faces: Comparing vision and touch. Journal of Vision, 12(1), Article 6. Retrieved from http://www.journalofvision.org/content/12/1/6.full

Dopjans

Wallraven

Bülthoff

H. H.

(2009). Cross-modal transfer in visual and haptic face recognition. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 2, 236–240.

Ernst

M. O.

Bülthoff

H. H.

(2004). Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 162–169.

10.

Fox

C. J.

Barton

J. J.

(2007). What is adapted in face adaptation? The neural representations of expression in the human visual system. Brain Research, 1127, 80–89.

11.

Ghazanfar

A. A.

Schroeder

C. E.

(2006). Is neocortex essentially multisensory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 278–285.

12.

Grill-Spector

Sayres

(2008). Object recognition: Insights from advances in fMRI methods. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 73–79.

13.

Jiang

Blanz

O’Toole

A. J.

(2006). Probing the visual representation of faces with adaptation: A view from the other side of the mean. Psychological Science, 17, 493–500.

14.

Kamachi

Hill

Lander

Vatikiotis-Bateson

(2003). “Putting the face to the voice”: Matching identity across modality. Current Biology, 13, 1709–1714.

15.

Kanwisher

Yovel

(2006). The fusiform face area: A cortical region specialized for the perception of faces. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 361, 2109–2128.

16.

Kilgour

A. R.

Lederman

S. J.

(2002). Face recognition by hand. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 339–352.

17.

Kilgour

A. R.

Lederman

S. J.

(2006). A haptic face-inversion effect. Perception, 35, 921–931.

18.

Kitada

Johnsrude

I. S.

Kochiyama

Lederman

S. J.

(2010). Brain networks involved in haptic and visual identification of facial expressions of emotion: An fMRI study. NeuroImage, 49, 1677–1689.

19.

Kitagawa

Ichihara

(2002). Hearing visual motion in depth. Nature, 416, 172–174.

20.

Klatzky

R. L.

Abramowicz

Hamilton

Lederman

S. J.

(2011). Irrelevant visual faces influence haptic identification of facial expressions of emotion. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 521–530.

21.

Konkle

Moore

C. I.

(2009). What can crossmodal aftereffects reveal about neural representation and dynamics? Communicative & Integrative Biology, 2, 479–481.

22.

Konkle

Wang

Hayward

Moore

C. I.

(2009). Motion aftereffects transfer between touch and vision. Current Biology, 19, 745–750.

23.

Lacey

Pappas

Kreps

Lee

Sathian

(2009). Perceptual learning of view-independence in visuo-haptic object representations. Experimental Brain Research, 198, 329–337.

24.

Lederman

S. J.

Klatzky

R. L.

Abramowicz

Salsman

Kitada

Hamilton

(2007). Haptic recognition of static and dynamic expressions of emotion in the live face. Psychological Science, 18, 158–164.

25.

Leopold

D. A.

O’Toole

A. J.

Vetter

Blanz

(2001). Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 89–94.

26.

Leopold

D. A.

Rhodes

Muller

K. M.

Jeffery

(2005). The dynamics of visual adaptation to faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 272, 897–904.

27.

Logothetis

N. K.

(2008). What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI. Nature, 453, 869–878.

28.

Matsumiya

(2012). Haptic face aftereffect. i-Perception, 3, 97–100.

29.

Rhodes

Evangelista

Jeffery

(2009). Orientation-sensitivity of face identity aftereffects. Vision Research, 49, 2379–2385.

30.

Rhodes

Jeffery

Watson

T. L.

Jaquet

Winkler

Clifford

C. W.

(2004). Orientation-contingent face aftereffects and implications for face-coding mechanisms. Current Biology, 14, 2119–2123.

31.

Roseboom

Nishida

Fujisaki

Arnold

D. H.

(2011). Audio-visual speech timing sensitivity is enhanced in cluttered conditions. PloS ONE, 6(4), e18309. Retrieved from http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0018309

32.

Ryu

J. J.

Borrmann

Chaudhuri

(2008). Imagine Jane and identify John: Face identity aftereffects induced by imagined faces. PloS ONE, 3(5), e2195. Retrieved from http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0002195

33.

Serino

Pizzoferrato

Ladavas

(2008). Viewing a face (especially one’s own face) being touched enhances tactile perception on the face. Psychological Science, 19, 434–438.

34.

Skinner

A. L.

Benton

C. P.

(2010). Anti-expression aftereffects reveal prototype-referenced coding of facial expressions. Psychological Science, 21, 1248–1253.

35.

Smith

E. L.

Grabowecky

Suzuki

(2007). Auditory-visual crossmodal integration in perception of face gender. Current Biology, 17, 1680–1685.

36.

Spence

Driver

(2004). Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

37.

Stein

B. E.

Stanford

T. R.

(2008). Multisensory integration: Current issues from the perspective of the single neuron. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9, 255–266.

38.

Webster

M. A.

Kaping

Mizokami

Duhamel

(2004). Adaptation to natural facial categories. Nature, 428, 557–561.

39.

Webster

M. A.

MacLin

O. H.

(1999). Figural aftereffects in the perception of faces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 647–653.

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.

0.00 MB

0.38 MB

Seeing a Haptically Explored Face

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material