PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Jay Edelman

Publications and source records attributed to Jay Edelman.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Information processing during face recognition: the effects of familiarity, inversion, and morphing on scanning fixations.

Where we make ocular fixations when viewing an object likely reflects interactions between 'external' object properties and internal 'top-down' factors, as our perceptual system tests hypotheses and attempts to make decisions about our environment. These scanning fixation patterns can tell us how and where the visual system gathers information critical to specific tasks. We determined the effects of the internal factors of expertise, experience, and ambiguity on scanning during a face-recognition task, in eight subjects. To assess the effects of expertise, we compared upright with inverted faces, since it is hypothesized that inverted faces do not access an orientation-dependent face-expert processor. To assess the effects of experience, we compared famous with novel faces, as famous faces would have stronger internal representations than anonymous ones. Ambiguity in matching seen and remembered faces was manipulated with morphed faces. We measured three classes of variables: (i) total scanning time and fixations; (ii) the spatial distribution of scanning; and (iii) the sequence of scanning, using first-order Markov matrices for local scan structure and string editing for global scan structure. We found that, with inverted faces, subjects redistributed fixations to the mouth and lower face, and their local and global scan structure became more random. With novel or morphed faces, they scanned the eyes and upper face more. Local scan structure was not affected by familiarity, but global scan structure was least random (most stereotyped) for novel upright faces. We conclude that expertise (upright faces) leads to less lower-face scanning and more predictable global patterns of information gathering. Experience (famous faces) leads to less upper-face scanning and more idiosyncratic global scan structures, suggesting a superseding influence of facial memories. With morphed faces, subjects return to the upper face to resolve ambiguity, implying a greater importance of this region in face recognition.

Adult↗

Switching, plasticity, and prediction in a saccadic task-switch paradigm.

Several cognitive processes are involved in task-switching. Using a prosaccade/antisaccade paradigm, we manipulated both the interval available for preparation between the cue and the target and the predictability of trial sequences, to isolate the contributions of foreknowledge, an active switching (reconfiguration) process, and passive inhibitory effects persisting from the prior trial. We tested 15 subjects with both a random and a regularly alternating trial sequence. Half of the trials had a short cue-target interval of 200 ms, and half a longer cue-target interval of 2,000 ms. When there was only a short preparatory interval, switching increased the latencies for both prosaccades and antisaccades. With a long preparatory interval, switching was associated with a smaller latency increase for prosaccades and, importantly, a paradoxical reduction in latency for antisaccades. Foreknowledge of a predictable sequence did not allow subjects to reduce switch costs in the manner that a long preparatory cue-target interval did. In the trials with short preparatory intervals, the effects on latency attributable to active reconfiguration processes were similar for prosaccades and antisaccades. We propose a model in which the passive inhibitory effects that persist from the prior saccadic trial are due not to task-set inertia, in which one task-set inhibits the opposite task-set, but to inhibition of the saccadic response-system by the antisaccade task, to account for the paradoxical set-switch benefit for antisaccades at long cue-target intervals. Our findings regarding foreknowledge show that previous studies used to support task-set inertia may have conflated the effects of both active reconfiguration and passive inhibitory processes on latency. While our model of response-system plasticity can explain a number of effects of dominance asymmetry in switching, other models fail to account for the paradoxical set-switch benefit for antisaccades.

Adult↗