MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129065850 · doi:10.1111/desc.12065

The effect of early visual deprivation on the development of face detection

2013· article· en· W2129065850 on OpenAlexafffund
Catherine J. Mondloch, Sidney J. Segalowitz, Terri L. Lewis, Jane Dywan, Richard Le Grand, Daphne Maurer

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityKwantlen Polytechnic UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenBrock University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychologyFace (sociological concept)Cognitive psychologyFace perceptionDevelopmental psychologySensory deprivationNeurosciencePerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expertise of adults in face perception is facilitated by their ability to rapidly detect that a stimulus is a face. In two experiments, we examined the role of early visual input in the development of face detection by testing patients who had been treated as infants for bilateral congenital cataract. Experiment 1 indicated that, at age 9 to 20, patients' accuracy and response times on a Mooney face detection task were normal. Experiment 2 revealed that the neural mechanisms underlying face detection in a similar group of adult patients are abnormal: the amplitude of both the P100 and N170 event-related potential were larger in patients than in visually normal controls, and the extent of augmentation was related to the duration of deprivation. Thus, early visual experience is necessary for the establishment of normal neural networks for face detection; abnormalities at these early processing stages may contribute to the deficits we previously reported in configural face processing for this patient cohort.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations85
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental ScienceSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207