Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

64 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Young Hay Ellis 85
22 ppl
diaries errors
miss recog
fam only couldn't place
couldn't name
Bruce and Young 86 model of face recognition
Types of encoding
visually derived
ID specific
facial speech
young 86
face vs name for naming fam occuapt
face= fame fastest, name slowest
name= name fastest, occupation slowest
Brennan 90
TOTT state :
rpt quest who last US president
show pic
give initials - most resolved
Supports Bruce and Young prediction
Hanley 98
face and voice
fam only
fam and occup (not name)
voice recog
more fam only
VRU harder to activate?
Give fave and voice = more recog
More routes to PIN activation
Hanley & Turner 2000
Faces recog easier or pref access PIN/NPU/SIU
blurred faces = voices
faces easier to recog not pref access
Moore & valentine 98
Tinme to name famous face= affected by fam and A0A and frequency (not D or name length
(poor method) rated fam so may be biased by currency of fame
Lewis 99
soap faces
Ctrld freq
AoA & Currency
Current, f and A0A early = faster did soap from
AOA + freq = familiarity
Burton Bruce and Johnson 96
Burton, Johnston & ellis
IAC accounts for prosopagnosia
match stored reps to fam faces
detect familiarity
semantic units containing info
can be inhibited or excitatory
If threshold reached= activation
deficit= partial disconnection of FRU and PINS
face neither familiar or has semantic info
Morrison 2001
POR patient : provoked overt recognition
patient given faces sharing an occupation, can ID occupation and name
Morrison 2001
prosopagnosics, 8 faces, common occupation, stimulation= below threshold, above pins activation
Pins to SIU
multiple pins (8 faces); increased threshold for SIUs to activate
Morrison 2001
attentional mechanism needed to retrieve names
do prosop have attention inhib at SIUs?
if enough stim in SIUS from individual pins, - reaction should increase the threshold of the PINS (reactivation) therefore SIUs increase threshold and name retrieved
Stone & Valentine 2003
Morrison 2003 - is person recog not face recog!
not ususally specified in IAC model
must be an increase in activation in PIN; results in right face being recognised
Sergent & Signoret 92
subjective recognitoin requires not just the activation of related sets of info but connections between sets
Valentine and stone
high activation to lots of faces not just one face ; pin must be linked to one face
Diamond 94
prosopagnosics = above chance for force choice test selecting names for faces - couldn't do if face given only
Sergent & Signoret 92
matching task faces to name not successful; therefore not clear how stimulation fx recog- can't recall all 8 names
Valentine and stone
attention only in context of POR - they find it incomprehendable; impact on other components not considered
Morrison 2001
attention prompted by expter; not spontaeous - must be due to attention!
Stone & Valentine 2003
attention not neccesary
Stone & Valentine 2003
if SIU activated proso would act spontaneously state name
dehann 91
study-spontaneous w prosopag and face recog
Diamond 94
patientnot allowed to be spontaneous - problem w method
Valentine & Stone 2003
If Threshold reached and feedback to pins ; pins inhibit within PINS -not activated before - presentation of each face - one by one increased activation of pins; therefore PINS activated by one face
Prosos able to face recog
generating shared occupation provides sufficient activation to raise the SIUs above threshold
Learning new faces
Jets and sharks
McClelland and Rumelhart 98
IAC-I (interactive)
name output units
NOU explains
time taken for familiarity, occupation, name, decisions, tot, covert recognition, semantic repetition priming
Associative and repetition priming in IAC
charles and diana
SIU linked to Diana's PIN
Therefore quicker to recog w associative priming (latent activation
Bruce & Valentine
Face primes for face, name primes for name, no cross priming with later recog
Burton 90
repetition priming like synapitic plasticity
Hebbian IAC
small activation at ends of links - link only strengthened abit
Hebbian IAC
Strengthening increased until at max excitation level
Hebbian IAC
if one end not excited- hebbian- stops activation therefore false recognition
Hebbian IAC
Inhibition proportionate to activation - eventually reaches full inhibitioin -1
Stevenage and lewis 2002
IACAPA- computer to use FRU, PINS and NOUS when represented w new face
Stevenage and lewis 2002
recognition task acquisition data over time of new faces - twins lizzie or rosie - compared w computerised IAC ; was able to aquire twin names sigmoidal curve
Bredart 95
names and semantic in sep pools
Burton 94
indicated that hebian synapse should be used for learning
see pic

Ellis, Burton, Young & Flude 97
Strengthening at FIU and FRU and FRU - PINS = help face recognition priming
Present all features
prime whole face
Rumelhart Hilton Williams 86
Golbal modification of weights in network therefore unale to recog error
Lewis 2002
golbal modification of weights in network difficult to apply to ICA
Sergent & Signoret 92
in these studies prosos may have may have recog individual faces as occupation links were made;
Sergent & Poncet 90
didn't name occupation unprompted - delay btw recall & time to recall , but shared occupation activations; may have increased SIU above threshold=recog