MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2212113954 · doi:10.1002/wcs.1374

Guidelines for studying developmental prosopagnosia in adults and children

2015· review· en· W2212113954 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kirsten A. Dalrymple, Romina Palermo

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive Science · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCentre of Excellence in Cognition and its Disorders, Australian Research Council
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developmental prosopagnosia (DP) is a neurodevelopmental condition characterized by severe face identity recognition problems that results from a failure to develop the mechanisms necessary for adequate face processing (Duchaine BC, Nakayama K. Developmental prosopagnosia: a window to content-specific face processing. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2006, 16:166-173.). It occurs in children and adults with normal visual acuity, and without intellectual impairments or known brain injuries. Given the importance of face recognition in daily life, and the detrimental effects of impaired face recognition, DP is an important area of study. Yet conventions for classifying individuals as DP for research purposes are poorly defined. In this focus paper, we discuss: (1) criteria for an operational definition of DP; 2) tests of face recognition and conventions for classifying individuals as DP; and 3) important considerations regarding common associations and dissociations, and cognitive heterogeneity in DP. We also highlight issues unique to studying DP in children, a relatively new endeavor that is proving to be an important complement to the work with adults. Ultimately, we hope to identify challenges researchers face when studying DP, and offer guidelines for others to consider when embarking on their own research pursuits on the topic. For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.014

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 head0.354
GPT teacher head0.486
Teacher spread0.132 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations112
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Cognitive ScienceSame topicFace Recognition and PerceptionFrench-language works237,207