Abstract
Fodor (1983) has proposed that face perception is carried out by an informationally encapsulated module, whose operation is unaffected by context or expectancies. We tested the modularity hypothesis by examining whether discriminations between normal and distorted versions of famous faces can be primed, either by the name of an associated person (semantic context) or by a valid cue as to the identity of the target face (expectancy). A preliminary experiment showed that, in the absence of priming, discriminations between normal and distorted versions of a face were unaffected by whether the target faces were familiar or not, confirming that these judgments tap perceptual, not postperceptual (semantic), coding processes. In Experiment 1, accuracy was significantly higher when target face pairs were preceded by related name primes, as compared with unrelated ones. In Experiment 2, reaction times were significantly faster for targets preceded by a valid identity cue than for targets preceded by an invalid one. Neither effect could be explained as a speed—accuracy tradeoff. These results fail to support Fodor’s conjecture that face processing is encapsulated.
Article PDF
References
Bruce, V., &Valentine, T. (1986). Semantic priming of familiar faces.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,38A, 125–150.
Bruce, V., &Young, A. (1986). Understanding face recognition.British Journal of Psychology,77, 305–327.
Burton, A. M., Bruce, V., &Johnston, R. A. (1990). Understanding face recognition with an interactive activation model.British Journal of Psychology,81, 361–380.
Coltheart, M. (1999). Modularity and cognition.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,3, 115–120.
de Haan, E. H. F., Young, A. W., &Newcombe, F. (1987). Face recognition without awareness.Cognitive Neuropsychology,4, 385–415.
de Renzi, E. (1986). Current issues on prosopagnosia. In H. D. Ellis, M. A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe, & A. W. Young (Eds.),Aspects of face processing (pp. 243–252). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.
Diamond, R., &Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,115, 107–117.
Farah, M. J., Levinson, K. L., &Klein, K. L. (1995). Face perception and within-category discrimination in prosopagnosia.Neuropsychologia,33, 661–674.
Farah, M. J., Wilson, K. D., Drain, N. M., &Tanaka, J. R. (1995). The inverted inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory face-specific processing mechanisms.Vision Research,35, 2089–2093.
Feinberg, T. E., Schindler, R. J., Ochoa, E., Kwan, P. C., &Farah, M. J. (1994). Associative visual agnosia and alexia without prosopagnosia.Cortex,30, 395–412.
Fodor, J. A. (1983).The modularity of mind: An essay on faculty psychology. London: MIT Press.
Fodor, J. A. (1990).A theory of content and other essays. London: MIT Press.
Goren, C. C., Sarty, M., &Wu, P. Y. K. (1975). Visual following and pattern discrimination of face-like stimuli by newborn infants.Pediatrics,56, 544–549.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1995). Mental imagery. In S. M. Kosslyn & D. N. Osherson (Eds.),An invitation to cognitive science: Vol. 2. Visual cognition (2nd ed., pp. 267–296). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
McNeil, J. E., &Warrington, E. K. (1993). Prosopagnosia: A facespecific disorder.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,46A, 1–10.
Moscovitch, M., Winocur, G., &Behrmann, M. (1997). What is special about face recognition? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,9, 555–604.
Pinker, S. (1997).How the mind works. London: Penguin.
Rhodes, G., Brennan, S., &Carey, S. (1987). Identification and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces.Cognitive Psychology,19, 473–497.
Rhodes, G., &Tremewan, T. (1993). The Simon then Garfunkel effect: Semantic priming, sensitivity, and the modularity of face recognition.Cognitive Psychology,25, 147–187.
Schweinberger, S. R. (1996). How Gorbachev primed Yeltsin: Analyses of associative priming in person recognition by means of reaction times and event-related brain potentials.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 1383–1407.
Searcy, J. H., &Bartlett, J. C. (1996). Inversion and processing of component and spatial-relational information in faces.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 904–915.
Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method.Acta Psychologica,30, 276–315.
Valenza, E., Simion, F., Cassia, V. M., &Umiltà, C. (1996). Face preference at birth.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 892–903.
Young, A. W., Ellis, A. W., Flude, B. M., McWeeny, K. H., &Hay, D. C. (1986). Face-name interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,12, 466–475.
Young, A. W., Flude, B. M., Hellawell, D. J., &Ellis, A. W. (1994). The nature of semantic priming effects in the recognition of familiar people.British Journal of Psychology,85, 393–411.
Young, A. W., McWeeny, K. H., Hay, D. C., &Ellis, A. W. (1986). Access to identity-specific semantic codes from familiar faces.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,38A, 271–295.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Part of this work was reported in an honors thesis submitted to the University of Western Australia by the first author.
Electronic supplementary material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Faulkner, T.F., Rhodes, G., Palermo, R. et al. Recognizing the un-real McCoy: Priming and the modularity of face recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9, 327–334 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196289
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196289