Faces as perceptual wholes: The interplay between component and configural properties in face processing

Abstract

The relative dominance of component and configural properties in face processing is a controversial issue. We examined this issue by testing whether the discriminability of components predicts the discrimination of faces with similar versus dissimilar configurations. Discrimination of faces with similar configurations was determined by components discriminability, indicating independent processing of facial components. The presence of configural variation had no effect on discriminating faces with highly discriminable components, suggesting that discrimination was based on the components. The presence of configural variation, however, facilitated the discrimination of faces with more difficult-to-discriminate components, above and beyond what would be predicted by the configural or componential discriminability, indicating interactive processing. No effect of configural variation was observed in discriminating inverted faces. These results suggest that both component and configural properties contribute to the processing of upright faces and no property necessarily dominates the other. Upright face discrimination can rely on components, configural properties, or interactive processing of component and configural properties, depending on the information available and the discriminability of the properties. Inverted faces are dominated by componential processing. The finding that interactive processing of component and configural properties surfaced when the properties were of similar, not very high discriminability, suggests that such interactive processing may be the dominant form of face processing in everyday life.

Keywords:

• Configural and holistic processing
• Configural properties
• Face processing
• Facial components
• Interactive processing of component and configural properties

Acknowledgements

This research was supported partly by Max Wertheimer Minerva Center for Cognitive Processes and Human Performance, University of Haifa, and a grant from the Research Authority, University of Haifa, to RK, and partly by a grant from Israel Foundation Trustees to RA. We thank Hanna Strominger for programming assistance and Roni Raz and Allegra Dan for assistance in data collection.

Notes

¹In this preliminary experiment we used two sets of four faces each: The faces in the intereyes set varied only in intereyes distance, and the faces in nose–mouth set varied only in nose–mouth distance. The four faces in each condition were created by modifying a single face in a way similar to the one described by Mondloch et al. (2002). Sixteen participants performed six discrimination tasks with the intereyes set, and another 16 participants performed six discrimination tasks with the nose–mouth set. Based on the discrimination data we chose intereye distances and nose–mouth distances that yielded discrimination latency and accuracy (756 ms, 3.8%, and 850 ms, 3.0%, for intereyes distance and nose–mouth distance, respectively) that were within the range of the discrimination latency and accuracy of the components, while not making the faces look grotesque.

²One may argue that the lack of an effect of configural variation on discrimination of faces with the most discriminable components is due to a ceiling effect. This possibility, however, seems unlikely in light of the fact that accuracy in all conditions of this experiment was at ceiling.