MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158373697 · doi:10.1002/dev.21094

Face memory deficits in patients deprived of early visual input by bilateral congenital cataracts

2012· article· en· W2158373697 on OpenAlexaff
Adélaïde de Heering, Daphne Maurer

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychobiology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyFace (sociological concept)PerceptionCognitive psychologyFace perceptionVisual memoryAudiologyCataractsGazeMemory testDevelopmental psychologyCognitionNeuroscienceMedicineOphthalmologyPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients treated for bilateral congenital cataract are later impaired on several hallmarks of adults' expertise with upright faces but report no problem with remembering faces. Here, we provide the first formal data on their face memory. We compared 12 adults with a history of visual deprivation from bilateral congenital cataracts to 24 age-matched controls with normal vision on their ability to recognize famous and recently learned faces, and on their subjective impression of their face memory. Bilateral congenital cataract patients demonstrated a prosopagnosic-like deficit, being slower and less accurate in recognizing both famous faces and recently learned faces, despite not differing on most questions about their impression of their face memory. Patients' results on three perceptual tasks (the composite face effect, the Benton test of recognizing faces through a change in point of view, and the Jane test of sensitivity to feature spacing) were also not correlated with their face memory deficits. These results suggest that early visual input is necessary not only for perceptual expertise in differentiating among unfamiliar upright faces, but also for normal accuracy in remembering the identity of individual faces.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations114
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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