Discrimination of Faces and Houses by Rhesus Monkeys: the Role of Stimulus Expertise and Rotation Angle

Overview

Journal Anim Cogn

Publisher Springer

Specialty Veterinary Medicine

Date 2008 Feb 8

PMID 18256863

Citations 16

Authors

Lisa A Parr

Matthew Heintz

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The face inversion effect, or impaired recognition of upside down compared to upright faces, is used as a marker for the configural processing of faces in primates. The inversion effect in humans and chimpanzees is strongest for categories of stimuli for which subjects have considerable expertise, primarily conspecifics' faces. Moreover, discrimination performance decreases linearly as faces are incrementally rotated from upright to inverted. This suggests that rotated faces must be transformed, or normalized back into their most typical viewpoint before configural processing can ensue, and the greater the required normalization, the greater the likelihood of errors resulting. Previous studies in our lab have demonstrated a general face inversion effect in rhesus monkeys that was not influenced by expertise. Therefore, the present study examined the influence of rotation angle on the visual perception of face and nonface stimuli that varied in their level of expertise to further delineate the processes underlying the inversion effect in rhesus monkeys. Five subjects discriminated images in five orientation angles. Results showed significant linear impairments for all stimulus categories, including houses. However, compared to the upright images, only rhesus faces resulted in worse performance at rotation angles greater than 45 degrees , suggesting stronger configural processing for stimuli for which subjects had the greatest expertise.

Citing Articles

The ability of teleost fishes to recognize individual faces suggests an early evolutionary origin in vertebrates.

Kohda M, Sogawa S, Sowersby W Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1497386.

PMID: 39664642 PMC: 11632839. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1497386.

Visual Perception of Photographs of Rotated 3D Objects in Goldfish ().

Wegman J, Morrison E, Wilcox K, DeLong C Animals (Basel). 2022; 12(14).

PMID: 35883344 PMC: 9311921. DOI: 10.3390/ani12141797.

Rhesus monkeys manipulate mental images.

Hassett T, Lord V, Hampton R Cognition. 2022; 228:105225.

PMID: 35843135 PMC: 9922027. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105225.

Rats (Rattus norvegicus) flexibly retrieve objects' non-spatial and spatial information from their visuospatial working memory: effects of integrated and separate processing of these features in a missing-object recognition task.

Keshen C, Cohen J Anim Cogn. 2015; 19(1):91-107.

PMID: 26311419 PMC: 4701772. DOI: 10.1007/s10071-015-0915-8.

Part-based and configural processing of owner's face in dogs.

Pitteri E, Mongillo P, Carnier P, Marinelli L, Huber L PLoS One. 2014; 9(9):e108176.

PMID: 25251285 PMC: 4177116. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108176.

References

Burmann B, Dehnhardt G, Mauck B . Visual information processing in the lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus): mental rotation or rotational invariance?. Brain Behav Evol. 2005; 65(3):168-76. DOI: 10.1159/000083626. View

Overman Jr W, Doty R . Hemispheric specialization displayed by man but not macaques for analysis of faces. Neuropsychologia. 1982; 20(2):113-28. DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(82)90002-1. View

Parr L, Dove T, Hopkins W . Why faces may be special: evidence of the inversion effect in chimpanzees. J Cogn Neurosci. 1998; 10(5):615-22. DOI: 10.1162/089892998563013. View

Vermeire B, Hamilton C . Inversion effect for faces in split-brain monkeys. Neuropsychologia. 1998; 36(10):1003-14. DOI: 10.1016/s0028-3932(98)00054-2. View

Rosenfeld S, Van Hoesen G . Face recognition in the rhesus monkey. Neuropsychologia. 1979; 17(5):503-9. DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(79)90057-5. View

Tomonaga M . Visual search for orientation of faces by a chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes): face-specific upright superiority and the role of facial configural properties. Primates. 2006; 48(1):1-12. DOI: 10.1007/s10329-006-0011-4. View

Bruce C . Face recognition by monkeys: absence of an inversion effect. Neuropsychologia. 1982; 20(5):515-21. DOI: 10.1016/0028-3932(82)90025-2. View

Farah M, Tanaka J, Drain H . What causes the face inversion effect?. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1995; 21(3):628-34. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.21.3.628. View

Hollard V, Delius J . Rotational invariance in visual pattern recognition by pigeons and humans. Science. 1982; 218(4574):804-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.7134976. View

10.

Valentine T, Bruce V . Mental rotation of faces. Mem Cognit. 1988; 16(6):556-66. DOI: 10.3758/bf03197057. View

11.

Gothard K, Erickson C, Amaral D . How do rhesus monkeys ( Macaca mulatta) scan faces in a visual paired comparison task?. Anim Cogn. 2004; 7(1):25-36. DOI: 10.1007/s10071-003-0179-6. View

12.

Neiworth J, Hassett J, Sylvester C . Face processing in humans and new world monkeys: the influence of experiential and ecological factors. Anim Cogn. 2006; 10(2):125-34. DOI: 10.1007/s10071-006-0045-4. View

13.

Parr L, Heintz M . The perception of unfamiliar faces and houses by chimpanzees: influence of rotation angle. Perception. 2007; 35(11):1473-83. DOI: 10.1068/p5455. View

14.

Gauthier I, Skudlarski P, Gore J, Anderson A . Expertise for cars and birds recruits brain areas involved in face recognition. Nat Neurosci. 2000; 3(2):191-7. DOI: 10.1038/72140. View

15.

Maurer D, Le Grand R, Mondloch C . The many faces of configural processing. Trends Cogn Sci. 2002; 6(6):255-260. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(02)01903-4. View

16.

Shepard R, Metzler J . Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science. 1971; 171(3972):701-3. DOI: 10.1126/science.171.3972.701. View

17.

Mauck B, Dehnhardt G . Mental rotation in a California sea lion (Zalophus californianus). J Exp Biol. 1997; 200(Pt 9):1309-16. DOI: 10.1242/jeb.200.9.1309. View

18.

Kohler C, Hoffmann K, Dehnhardt G, Mauck B . Mental rotation and rotational invariance in the Rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta). Brain Behav Evol. 2005; 66(3):158-66. DOI: 10.1159/000087156. View

19.

Lewis M, Glenister T . A sideways look at configural encoding: two different effects of face rotation. Perception. 2003; 32(1):7-14. DOI: 10.1068/p3404. View

20.

Carey S, Diamond R . From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. Science. 1977; 195(4275):312-4. DOI: 10.1126/science.831281. View