MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037375572 · doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21104

Semantic Learning Modifies Perceptual Face Processing

2008· article· en· W2037375572 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer J. Heisz, Judith M. Shedden

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepetition (rhetorical device)PsychologyPerceptionFace (sociological concept)Semantic memoryCognitive psychologyFace perceptionPerceptual learningEvent-related potentialElectroencephalographyCommunicationCognitionLinguisticsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Face processing changes when a face is learned with personally relevant information. In a five-day learning paradigm, faces were presented with rich semantic stories that conveyed personal information about the faces. Event-related potentials were recorded before and after learning during a passive viewing task. When faces were novel, we observed the expected N170 repetition effect-a reduction in amplitude following face repetition. However, when faces were learned with personal information, the N170 repetition effect was eliminated, suggesting that semantic information modulates the N170 repetition effect. To control for the possibility that a simple perceptual effect contributed to the change in the N170 repetition effect, another experiment was conducted using stories that were not related to the person (i.e., stories about rocks and volcanoes). Although viewers were exposed to the faces an equal amount of time, the typical N170 repetition effect was observed, indicating that personal semantic information associated with a face, and not simply perceptual exposure, produced the observed reduction in the N170 repetition effect. These results are the first to reveal a critical perceptual change in face processing as a result of learning person-related information. The results have important implications for researchers studying face processing, as well as learning and memory in general, as they demonstrate that perceptual information alone is not enough to establish familiarity akin to real-world person learning.

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 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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cognitive NeuroscienceSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207