MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966686001 · doi:10.1037/0894-4105.20.1.30

Face perception in high-functioning autistic adults: Evidence for superior processing of face parts, not for a configural face-processing deficit.

2006· article· en· W1966686001 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Rivière-des-Prairies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAutismFace perceptionPerceptionPriming (agriculture)Cognitive psychologyFace (sociological concept)Developmental psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Configural processing in autism was studied in Experiment 1 by using the face inversion effect. A normal inversion effect was observed in the participants with autism, suggesting intact configural face processing. A priming paradigm using partial or complete faces served in Experiment 2 to assess both local and configural face processing. Overall, normal priming effects were found in participants with autism, irrespective of whether the partial face primes were intuitive face parts (i.e., eyes, nose, etc.) or arbitrary segments. An exception, however, was that participants with autism showed magnified priming with single face parts relative to typically developing control participants. The present findings argue for intact configural processing in autism along with an enhanced processing for individual face parts. The face-processing peculiarities known to characterize autism are discussed on the basis of these results and past congruent results with nonsocial stimuli.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it