Early monocular enucleation selectively disrupts the development of neural mechanisms for face perception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Monocular enucleation (surgical removal of one eye) during infancy results in intact low- to mid-level spatial vision (see Kelly et al., 2013 for a review). A mild impairment is observed, however, for the higher-level spatial vision ability, face perception, compared to binocularly intact controls (Kelly et al., 2012). Nonetheless, house perception is intact, suggesting a face-specific deficit with early enucleation. Similar face deficits are observed in monocular deprivation from congenital cataract (Le Grand et al., 2003, 2004). Further, early monocular deprivation from amblyopia and strabismus decreases functional activation in face-selective brain regions, including the middle fusiform gyrus [fusiform face area (FFA)] and inferior occipital gyrus [occipital face area (OFA)] (Lerner et al., 2003, 2006). Here, we sought to determine if decreased functional activation in face-specific brain regions are also present following early monocular enucleation. Methods. Six adults who had one eye enucleated early in life due to retinoblastoma (cancer of the retina) were compared to eight age- and sex-matched binocular and monocular viewing controls. All participants were placed in a 3T scanner and viewed blocks of images of faces, places, and objects. Repetition detection was used to maintain attention. Whole brain analyses were conducted to locate face-selective regions (FFA, OFA), and place-selective regions [parrahippocampal region (PPA), transverse occipital sulcus (TOS)] were used as a control comparison. Results. The early monocular enucleation group exhibited reduced activation in face-selective, but not place-selective, regions compared to controls. Conclusions. Our data are consistent with the previously reported behavioural face perception impairment. These findings suggest that although low- to mid-level spatial vision is intact, a lack of binocularity from early monocular enucleation specifically disrupts the behavioural and neural development of face perception, but not other forms of higher-level image category processing. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2014
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".