Verhallen Roeland J, Bosten Jenny M, Goodbourn Patrick T, Lawrance-Owen Adam J, Bargary Gary, Mollon J D
Department of Psychology, Downing St., Cambridge CB2 3EB, United Kingdom.
Department of Psychology, Downing St., Cambridge CB2 3EB, United Kingdom; School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Vision Res. 2017 Dec;141:217-227. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2016.12.014. Epub 2017 Jan 13.
The ability to recognize faces varies considerably between individuals, but does performance co-vary for tests of different aspects of face processing? For 397 participants (of whom the majority were university students) we obtained scores on the Mooney Face Test, Glasgow Face Matching Test (GFMT), Cambridge Face Memory Test (CFMT) and Composite Face Test. Overall performance was significantly correlated for each pair of tests, and we suggest the term f for the factor underlying this pattern of positive correlations. However, there were large variations in the amount of variance shared by individual tests: The GFMT and CFMT are strongly related, whereas the GFMT and the Mooney test tap largely independent abilities. We do not replicate a frequently reported relationship between holistic processing (from the Composite test) and face recognition (from the CFMT)-indeed, holistic processing does not correlate with any of our tests. We report associations of performance with digit ratio and autism-spectrum quotient (AQ), and from our genome-wide association study we include a list of suggestive genetic associations with performance on the four face tests, as well as with f.
个体之间识别面孔的能力差异很大，但对面部处理不同方面的测试表现是否会共同变化呢？对于397名参与者（其中大多数是大学生），我们获得了他们在穆尼面孔测试、格拉斯哥面孔匹配测试（GFMT）、剑桥面孔记忆测试（CFMT）和合成面孔测试中的分数。每对测试的总体表现都显著相关，我们将这种正相关模式背后的因素称为f。然而，各个测试所共享的方差量存在很大差异：GFMT和CFMT密切相关，而GFMT和穆尼测试所涉及的能力在很大程度上是独立的。我们没有复制经常报道的整体加工（来自合成测试）与面孔识别（来自CFMT）之间的关系——实际上，整体加工与我们的任何测试都不相关。我们报告了表现与指距比和自闭症谱系商数（AQ）的关联，并且在我们的全基因组关联研究中，我们列出了与四项面孔测试表现以及与f的潜在基因关联清单。
