ERP experiments examined global/local biases in face perception, suggesting neurophysiological markers indicate perceptive mismatch.
Global/local biases in the visual processing of structurally complex stimuli occur under certain conditions of the beholder. Previous experiments using hierarchical letters (large letters made of small ones) have reported a global precedence in young adults. Here, we aimed to define neurophysiological markers of a possible global/local bias during the implicit processing of new faces. We performed two ERP experiments on young adults using hierarchical/compound facial stimuli, either congruent (eyes replaced by small faces) or incongruent (objects as eyes), with peripheral small objects and faces, respectively, grafted as distracters. In Experiment 1, the face-sensitive N170/VPP was largest for regular faces and progressively decreased through congruent and incongruent hierarchical faces, evidencing disruption of the global bias. In Experiment 2, N170/VPP was similar between both hierarchical faces and a new objects condition, likely due to the visual angle increase used to prevent a global bias. Moreover, an N200-350 with maximal amplitude for incongruent faces and objects appeared in both experiments, suggesting a perceptive mismatch with a canonical face template. Experiment 2 also revealed a posterior negativity ∼220-330 msec for objects and faces, likely indicating access to known categories, as well as an object-specific late positivity that could reflect pre-semantic, visual recognition of common objects. Source reconstruction highlighted the significant involvement of ventral (predominantly right-sided) visual regions in these ERP modulations. This experimental design can be useful to detect global/local biases and several markers of face and object processing related to individual differences and neurodegenerative diseases even before they manifest overtly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiménez-Bascuñán et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: