Cargando…

Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces

Facial recognition is widely thought to involve a holistic perceptual process, and optimal recognition performance can be rapidly achieved within two fixations. However, is facial identity encoding likewise holistic and rapid, and how do gaze dynamics during encoding relate to recognition? While hav...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arizpe, Joseph M., Noles, Danielle L., Tsao, Jack W., Chan, Annie W.-Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6802769/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31735810
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision3010009
_version_ 1783460851979649024
author Arizpe, Joseph M.
Noles, Danielle L.
Tsao, Jack W.
Chan, Annie W.-Y.
author_facet Arizpe, Joseph M.
Noles, Danielle L.
Tsao, Jack W.
Chan, Annie W.-Y.
author_sort Arizpe, Joseph M.
collection PubMed
description Facial recognition is widely thought to involve a holistic perceptual process, and optimal recognition performance can be rapidly achieved within two fixations. However, is facial identity encoding likewise holistic and rapid, and how do gaze dynamics during encoding relate to recognition? While having eye movements tracked, participants completed an encoding (“study”) phase and subsequent recognition (“test”) phase, each divided into blocks of one- or five-second stimulus presentation time conditions to distinguish the influences of experimental phase (encoding/recognition) and stimulus presentation time (short/long). Within the first two fixations, several differences between encoding and recognition were evident in the temporal and spatial dynamics of the eye-movements. Most importantly, in behavior, the long study phase presentation time alone caused improved recognition performance (i.e., longer time at recognition did not improve performance), revealing that encoding is not as rapid as recognition, since longer sequences of eye-movements are functionally required to achieve optimal encoding than to achieve optimal recognition. Together, these results are inconsistent with a scan path replay hypothesis. Rather, feature information seems to have been gradually integrated over many fixations during encoding, enabling recognition that could subsequently occur rapidly and holistically within a small number of fixations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6802769
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68027692019-11-14 Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces Arizpe, Joseph M. Noles, Danielle L. Tsao, Jack W. Chan, Annie W.-Y. Vision (Basel) Article Facial recognition is widely thought to involve a holistic perceptual process, and optimal recognition performance can be rapidly achieved within two fixations. However, is facial identity encoding likewise holistic and rapid, and how do gaze dynamics during encoding relate to recognition? While having eye movements tracked, participants completed an encoding (“study”) phase and subsequent recognition (“test”) phase, each divided into blocks of one- or five-second stimulus presentation time conditions to distinguish the influences of experimental phase (encoding/recognition) and stimulus presentation time (short/long). Within the first two fixations, several differences between encoding and recognition were evident in the temporal and spatial dynamics of the eye-movements. Most importantly, in behavior, the long study phase presentation time alone caused improved recognition performance (i.e., longer time at recognition did not improve performance), revealing that encoding is not as rapid as recognition, since longer sequences of eye-movements are functionally required to achieve optimal encoding than to achieve optimal recognition. Together, these results are inconsistent with a scan path replay hypothesis. Rather, feature information seems to have been gradually integrated over many fixations during encoding, enabling recognition that could subsequently occur rapidly and holistically within a small number of fixations. MDPI 2019-02-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6802769/ /pubmed/31735810 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision3010009 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Arizpe, Joseph M.
Noles, Danielle L.
Tsao, Jack W.
Chan, Annie W.-Y.
Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces
title Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces
title_full Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces
title_fullStr Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces
title_full_unstemmed Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces
title_short Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces
title_sort eye movement dynamics differ between encoding and recognition of faces
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6802769/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31735810
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision3010009
work_keys_str_mv AT arizpejosephm eyemovementdynamicsdifferbetweenencodingandrecognitionoffaces
AT nolesdaniellel eyemovementdynamicsdifferbetweenencodingandrecognitionoffaces
AT tsaojackw eyemovementdynamicsdifferbetweenencodingandrecognitionoffaces
AT chananniewy eyemovementdynamicsdifferbetweenencodingandrecognitionoffaces