Next Article in Journal
The Effect of Stimulus Area on Global Motion Thresholds in Children and Adults
Previous Article in Journal
Reliability and Generalizability of Similarity-Based Fusion of MEG and fMRI Data in Human Ventral and Dorsal Visual Streams
Open AccessArticle

Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces

1
Department of Neurology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN 38163, USA
2
Children’s Foundation Research Institute, Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital, Memphis, TN 38103, USA
3
Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234, USA
4
School of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN 38163, USA
5
Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN 38163, USA
6
Memphis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Memphis, TN 38104, USA
7
Department of Radiology, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN 38163, USA
8
Department of Life Sciences, Centre for Cognitive Neuroscience, Division of Psychology, Brunel University London, London, UB8 3PH, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 17 May 2018 / Revised: 15 November 2018 / Accepted: 26 December 2018 / Published: 12 February 2019
Facial recognition is widely thought to involve a holistic perceptual process, and optimal recognition performance can be rapidly achieved within two fixations. However, is facial identity encoding likewise holistic and rapid, and how do gaze dynamics during encoding relate to recognition? While having eye movements tracked, participants completed an encoding (“study”) phase and subsequent recognition (“test”) phase, each divided into blocks of one- or five-second stimulus presentation time conditions to distinguish the influences of experimental phase (encoding/recognition) and stimulus presentation time (short/long). Within the first two fixations, several differences between encoding and recognition were evident in the temporal and spatial dynamics of the eye-movements. Most importantly, in behavior, the long study phase presentation time alone caused improved recognition performance (i.e., longer time at recognition did not improve performance), revealing that encoding is not as rapid as recognition, since longer sequences of eye-movements are functionally required to achieve optimal encoding than to achieve optimal recognition. Together, these results are inconsistent with a scan path replay hypothesis. Rather, feature information seems to have been gradually integrated over many fixations during encoding, enabling recognition that could subsequently occur rapidly and holistically within a small number of fixations. View Full-Text
Keywords: face; eye-movement; encoding; recognition; gaze; fixation; identification face; eye-movement; encoding; recognition; gaze; fixation; identification
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Arizpe, J.M.; Noles, D.L.; Tsao, J.W.; Chan, A. .-Y. Eye Movement Dynamics Differ between Encoding and Recognition of Faces. Vision 2019, 3, 9.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop