School of Psychology, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Sci Rep. 2021 Feb 23;11(1):4380. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-83844-3.
We believe we are now in a position to answer the question, "Are faces special?" inasmuch as this applies to the face inversion effect (better performance for upright vs inverted faces). Using a double-blind, between-subject design, in two experiments (n = 96) we applied a specific tDCS procedure targeting the Fp3 area while participants performed a matching-task with faces (Experiment 1a) or checkerboards from a familiar prototype-defined category (Experiment 1b). Anodal tDCS eliminated the checkerboard inversion effect reliably obtained in the sham group, but only reduced it for faces (although the reduction was significant). Thus, there is a component to the face inversion effect that we are not affecting with a tDCS procedure that can eliminate the checkerboard inversion effect. We suggest that the reduction reflects the loss of an expertise-based component in the face inversion effect, and the residual is due to a face-specific component of that effect.
我们相信,我们现在能够回答“面孔是否特殊?”这个问题,因为这适用于面孔倒置效应(相对于倒置面孔,正立面孔的表现更好)。在两个实验中(n=96),我们使用了一种双盲、被试间设计,在参与者进行面孔匹配任务(实验 1a)或来自熟悉原型定义类别的棋盘(实验 1b)时,应用了一种针对 Fp3 区域的特定 tDCS 程序。阳极 tDCS 可靠地消除了假刺激组中获得的棋盘倒置效应,但仅对面孔有影响(尽管这种影响是显著的)。因此,面孔倒置效应中有一个我们无法通过 tDCS 程序影响的成分,这种程序可以消除棋盘倒置效应。我们认为,这种减少反映了面孔倒置效应中基于专业知识的成分的丧失,而剩余的部分则是由于该效应的一个特定于面孔的成分。