2010 | 6 | 23-34
Article title

Configural and featural processing in humans with congenital prosopagnosia

Selected contents from this journal
Title variants
Languages of publication
Prosopagnosia describes the failure to recognize faces, a deficiency that can be devastating in social interactions. Cases of acquired prosopagnosia have often been described over the last century. In recent years, more and more cases of congenital prosopagnosia (CP) have been reported. In the present study we tried to determine possible cognitive characteristics of this impairment. We used scrambled and blurred images of faces, houses, and sugar bowls to separate featural processing strategies from configural processing strategies. This served to investigate whether congenital prosopagnosia results from process-specific deficiencies, or whether it is a face-specific impairment. Using a delayed matching paradigm, 6 individuals with CP and 6 matched healthy controls indicated whether an intact test stimulus was the same identity as a previously presented scrambled or blurred cue stimulus. Analyses ofd'values indicated that congenital prosopagnosia is a face-specific deficit, but that this shortcoming is particularly pronounced for processing configural facial information.
Physical description
  • Department of Psychology, University of Münster, Germany
  • Department of Psychology, University of Bern, Switzerland
  • Institute for Biomagnetism and Biosignalanalysis, University of Münster, Germany
  • Avidan, G., Hasson, U., Malach, R., & Behrmann, M. (2005). Detailed exploration of face-related processing in congenital prosopagnosia: 2. Functional neuroimaging findings.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1150-1167.
  • Bartlett, J. C., Searcy, J., & Abdi, H. (2003). What are the routes to face recognition? In M. A. Petersen & G. Rhodes (Eds.),Perception of faces, objects, and scenes(pp. 21-52). New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Barton, J. J., Cherkasova, M., & O'Connor, M. (2001). Covert recognition in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia.Neurology, 57, 1161-1168.
  • Barton, J. J., Press, D. Z., Keenan, J. P., & O'Connor, M. (2002). Lesions of the fusiform face area impair perception of facial configuration in prosopagnosia.Neurology, 58, 71-78.
  • Behrmann, M., & Avidan, G. (2005). Congenital prosopagnosia: Face-blind from birth.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 180-187.
  • Behrmann, M., Avidan, G., Gao, F., & Black, S. (2007). Structural imaging reveals anatomical alterations in inferotemporal cortex in congenital prosopagnosia.Cerebral Cortex, 17, 2354-2363.
  • Behrmann, M., Avidan, G., Marotta, J. J., & Kimchi, R. (2005). Detailed exploration of face-related processing in congenital prosopagnosia: 1. Behavioral findings.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1130-1149.
  • Benton, A. L., Sivan, A. B., Hamsher, K., Varney, N. R., & Spreen, O. (1983).Contribution to neuropsychological assessment.New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Bentin, S., DeGutis, J. M., D'Esposito, M., & Robertson, L. C. (2007). Too many trees to see the forest: Performance, event-related potential, and functional magnetic resonance imaging manifestations of integrative congenital prosopagnosia.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 132-146.
  • Bentin, S., Deouell, L. Y., & Soroker, N. (1999). Selective visual streaming in face recognition: Evidence from developmental prosopagnosia.NeuroReport, 10, 823-827.
  • Biederman, I. (1987). Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding.Psychological Review, 94, 115-147.
  • Bodamer, J. (1947). Die Prosop-Agnosie [Prosop-Agnosia].Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 179, 6-53.
  • Bombari, D., Mast, F. W., & Lobmaier, J. S. (2009). Featural, configural, and holistic face-processing strategies evoke different scan patterns.Perception, 38, 1508-1521.
  • Cabeza, R., & Kato, T. (2000). Features are also important: Contributions of featural and configural processing to face recognition.Psychological Science, 11, 429-433.
  • Carbon, C. C., Gruter, T., Weber, J. E., & Lueschow, A. (2007). Faces as objects of non-expertise: Processing of thatcherised faces in congenital prosopagnosia.Perception, 36, 1635-1645.
  • Collishaw, S. M., & Hole, G. J. (2000). Featural and configurational processes in the recognition of faces of different familiarity.Perception, 29, 893-909.
  • de Gelder, B., & Rouw, R. (2000). Configural face processes in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia: Evidence for two separate face systems?NeuroReport, 11, 3145-3150.
  • de Hahn, E. H. (1999). A familiar factor in the development of face recognition deficits.Journal of Clinical and Experimental Beuropsychology, 21, 312-315.
  • Degutis, J. M., Bentin, S., Robertson, L. C., & D'Esposito, M. (2007). Functional plasticity in ventral temporal cortex following cognitive rehabilitation of a congenital prosopagnosic.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1790-1802.
  • Diamond, R., & Carey, S. (1986). Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise.Journal of Experimental Psychology, General, 115, 107-117.
  • Dobel, C., Bolte, J., Aicher, M., & Schweinberger, S. R. (2007). Prosopagnosia without apparent cause: Overview and diagnosis of six cases.Cortex, 43, 718-733.
  • Dobel, C., Putsche, C., Zwitserlood, P., & Junghofer, M. (2008). Early left-hemispheric dysfunction of face processing in congenital prosopagnosia: An MEG study.PLoS ONE, 3, e2326.
  • Duchaine, B. C. (2000). Developmental prosopagnosia with normal configural processing.NeuroReport, 11, 79-83.
  • Duchaine, B. C., Dingle, K., Butterworth, E., & Nakayama, K. (2004). Normal greeble learning in a severe case of developmental prosopagnosia.Neuron, 43, 469-473.
  • Duchaine, B. C., & Nakayama, K. (2004). Developmental prosopagnosia and the Benton Facial Recognition Test.Neurology, 62, 1219-1220.
  • Duchaine, B. C., & Nakayama, K. (2005). Dissociations of face and object recognition in developmental prosopagnosia.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 249-261.
  • Duchaine, B. C., & Nakayama, K. (2006). Developmental prosopagnosia: A window to content-specific face processing.Current Opinions in Neurobiology, 16, 166-173.
  • Duchaine, B. C., Nieminen-von Wendt, T., New, J., & Kulomaki, T. (2003). Dissociations of visual recognition in a developmental agnosic: Evidence for separate developmental processes.Neurocase, 9, 380-389.
  • Duchaine, B. C., & Weidenfeld, A. (2002). An evaluation of two commonly used tests of unfamiliar face recognition.Neuropsychologia, 1534, 1-8.
  • Farah, M. J., Tanaka, J. W., & Drain, H. M. (1995). What causes the face inversion effect?Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, 21, 628-634.
  • Farah, M. J., Wilson, K. D., Drain, M., & Tanaka, J. N. (1998). What is "special" about face perception?Psychological Review, 105, 482-498.
  • Fast, K., Fujiwara, E., & Markowitsch, H. J. (in press).Famous faces test - Ein Verfahren zur Erfassung semantischer Altgedächtnisleistungen[Famous faces test - A procedure measuring the capacity of old semantic memories]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
  • Gruter, T., Gruter, M., Bell, V., & Carbon, C. C. (2009). Visual mental imagery in congenital prosopagnosia.Neuroscience Letters, 453, 135-140.
  • Gruter, T., Gruter, M., & Carbon, C. C. (2008). Neural and genetic foundations of face recognition and prosopagnosia.Journal of Neuropsychology, 2, 79-97.
  • Haig, N. D. (1984). The effect of feature displacement on face recognition.Perception, 13, 505-512.
  • Kennerknecht, I., Grueter, T., Welling, B., Wentzek, S., Horst, J., Edwards, S., et al. (2006). First report of prevalence of non-syndromic hereditary prosopagnosia (HPA).American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 140, 1617-1622.
  • Kress, T., & Daum, I. (2003). Developmental prosopagnosia: A review.Behavioral Neurology, 14, 109-121.
  • Lange, J., de Lussanet, M., Kuhlmann, S., Zimmermann, A., Lappe, M., Zwitserlood, P., et al. (2009). Impairments of biological motion perception in congenital prosopagnosia.PLoS ONE, 4, e7414.
  • Leder, H., & Bruce, V. (2000). When inverted faces are recognized: The role of configural information in face recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section a-Human Experimental Psychology, 53, 513-536.
  • Leder, H., & Carbon, C.-C. (2005). When context hinders! Context superiority versus learn-test-compatibilities in face recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 58, 235-250.
  • Leder, H., & Carbon, C.-C. (2006). Face-specific configural processing of relational information.British Journal of Psychology, 97, 19-29.
  • Lobmaier, J. S., Klaver, P., Loenneker, T., Martin, E., & Mast F. W. (2008). Featural and configural face processing strategies: Evidence from a functional magnetic resonance imaging study.NeuroReport, 19, 287-291.
  • Lobmaier, J. S., & Mast, F. W. (2007). Perception of novel faces: The parts have it!Perception, 36, 1660-1673.
  • Lobmaier, J. S., & Mast, F. W. (2008). Face imagery is based on featural representations.Experimental Psychology, 55, 47-53.
  • Macho, S., & Leder, H. (1998). Your eyes only? A test of interactive influence in the processing of facial features.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1486-1500.
  • Marr, D. (1982).Vision.San Francisco: Freeman.
  • Maurer, D., Le Grand, R., & Mondloch, C. J. (2002). The many faces of configural processing.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 225-260.
  • Mondloch, C. J., Geldart, S., Maurer, D., & Le Grand, R. (2003). Developmental changes in face processing skills.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 86, 67-84.
  • Nunn, J. A., Postma, P., & Pearson, R. (2001). Developmental prosopagnosia: Should it be taken at face value?Neurocase, 7, 15-27.
  • Rakover, S. S. (2002). Featural vs. configurational information in faces: A conceptual and empirical analysis.British Journal of Psychology, 93, 1-30.
  • Rossion, B., Dricot, L., Devolder, A., Bodart, J. M., Crommelinck, M., De Gelder, B., et al. (2000). Hemispheric asymmetries for whole-based and part-based face processing in the human fusiform gyrus.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 793-802.
  • Schwaninger, A., Lobmaier, J. S., & Collishaw, S. M. (2002). Role of featural and configural information in familiar and unfamiliar face recognition.Lecture Notes in Computer Sciences, 2525, 634-650.
  • Schwarzer, G., Huber, S., Gruter, M., Gruter, T., Gross, C., Hipfel, M., et al. (2007). Gaze behaviour in hereditary prosopagnosia.Psychological Research, 71, 583-590.
  • Searcy, J. H., & Bartlett, J. C. (1996). Inversion and processing of component and spatial-relation information of faces.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 904-915.
  • Sergent, J. (1984). Configural processing of faces in the left and the right cerebral hemispheres.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 554-572.
  • Tanaka, J. W., & Farah, M. J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 46, 225-245.
  • Tanaka, J. W., & Sengco, J. A. (1997). Features and their configuration in face recognition.Memory and Cognition, 25, 583-592.
  • Thomas, C., Avidan, G., Humphreys, K., Jung, K. J., Gao, F., & Behrmann, M. (2009). Reduced structural connectivity in ventral visual cortex in congenital prosopagnosia.Nature Neuroscience, 12, 29-31.
  • Warrington, E. K., & James, M. (1992).Testbatterie für visuelle Objekt- und Raumwahrnehmung[Test battery for visual object-and space perception]. Bury ST Edmunds: Thames Valley Test Company.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.