MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311522744 · doi:10.1016/j.ynirp.2022.100148

Impact of face outline, parafoveal feature number and feature type on early face perception in a gaze-contingent paradigm: A mass-univariate re-analysis of ERP data

2022· article· en· W4311522744 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroimage Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFace Recognition and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnivariateFeature (linguistics)PerceptionPsychologyGazeFace (sociological concept)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)ToolboxElectroencephalographyArtificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionCognitive psychologyMultivariate statisticsMachine learningLinguisticsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent ERP research using a gaze-contingent paradigm suggests the face-sensitive N170 component is modulated by the presence of a face outline, the number of parafoveal facial features, and the type of feature in parafovea (Parkington and Itier, 2019). The present study re-analyzed these data using robust mass univariate statistics available through the LIMO toolbox, allowing the examination of the ERP signal across all electrodes and time points. We replicated the finding that the presence of a face outline significantly reduced ERP latencies and amplitudes, suggesting it is an important cue to the prototypical face template. However, we found that this effect began around 114 ms, and was maximal during the P1-N170 and N170-P2 intervals. The number of features present in parafovea also impacted the entire waveform, with systematic reductions in amplitude and latency as the number of features increased. This effect was maximal around 120 ms during the P1-N170 interval and around 170 ms between the N170 and P2. The ERP response was also modulated by feature type; contrary to previous findings this effect was maximal around 200 ms and the P2 peak. Although we provide partial replication of the previous results on the N170, the effects were more temporally distributed in the present analysis. These effects were generally maximal before and after the N170 and were the weakest at the N170 peak itself. This re-analysis demonstrates that classical ERP analysis can obscure important aspects of face processing beyond the N170 peak, and that tools like mass univariate statistics are needed to shed light on the whole time-course of face processing.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.722
Threshold uncertainty score0.935

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.279 · 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