Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 529–535 | Cite as

Cuing effects of faces are dependent on handedness and visual field

  • Emma Ferneyhough
  • Damian A. Stanley
  • Elizabeth A. Phelps
  • Marisa Carrasco
Brief Reports

Abstract

Faces are unlike other visual objects we encounter, in that they alert us to potentially relevant social information. Both face processing and spatial attention are dominant in the right hemisphere of the human brain, with a stronger lateralization in right- than in left-handers. Here, we demonstrate behavioral evidence for an effect of handedness on performance in tasks using faces to direct attention. Nonpredictive, peripheral cues (faces or dots) directed exogenous attention to contrast-varying stimuli (Gabor patches)—a tilted target, a vertical distractor, or both; observers made orientation discriminations on the target stimuli. Whereas cuing with dots increased contrast sensitivity in both groups, cuing with faces increased contrast sensitivity in right- but not in left-handers, for whom opposite hemifield effects resulted in no net increase. Our results reveal that attention modulation by face cues critically depends on handedness and visual hemifield. These previously unreported interactions suggest that such lateralized systems may be functionally connected.

References

  1. Bocanegra, B. R., & Zeelenberg, R. (2009). Emotion improves and impairs early vision. Psychological Science, 20, 707–713. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02354.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boles, D. B. (1989). Do visual field asymmetries intercorrelate? Neuropsychologia, 27, 697–704. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(89)90114-0PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourne, V. J. (2008). Examining the relationship between degree of handedness and degree of cerebral lateralization for processing facial emotion. Neuropsychologia, 22, 350–356. doi:10.1037/0894-4105.22.3.350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436. doi:10.1163/156856897X00357PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carrasco, M. (2006). Covert attention increases contrast sensitivity: Psychophysical, neurophysiological and neuroimaging studies. Progress in Brain Research, 154, 33–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carrasco, M., Penpeci-Talgar, C., & Eckstein, M. P. (2000). Spatial covert attention increases contrast sensitivity across the CSF: Support for signal enhancement. Vision Research, 40, 1203–1215. doi:10.1016/ S0042-6989(00)00024-9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dronkers, N. F., & Knight, R. T. (1989). Right-sided neglect in a left-hander: Evidence for reversed hemispheric specialization of attention capacity. Neuropsychologia, 27, 729–735. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(89)90118-8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. (1976). Pictures of facial affect. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  9. Elder, J. H., Balaban, D. Y., Kamyab, A., Wilcox, L., & Hou, Y. (2008). Selectivity for faces as exogenous attentional cues [Abstract]. Journal of Vision,8(6), 685a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eriksen, C. W., & St. James, J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model. Perception & Psychophysics, 40, 225–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Evert, D. L., McGlinchey-Berroth, R., Verfaellie, M., & Milberg, W. P. (2003). Hemispheric asymmetries for selective attention apparent only with increased task demands in healthy participants. Brain & Cognition, 53, 34–41. doi:10.1016/S0278-2626(03)00207-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fecteau, J. H., Enns, J. T., & Kingstone, A. (2000). Competitioninduced visual field differences in search. Psychological Science, 11, 386–393. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fuller, S., Park, Y., & Carrasco, M. (2009). Cue contrast modulates the effects of exogenous attention on appearance. Vision Research, 49, 1825–1837. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2009.04.019PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Haxby, J. V., Hoffman, E. A., & Gobbini, M. I. (2002). Human neural systems for face recognition and social communication. Biological Psychiatry, 51, 59–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kinchla, R. A. (1992). Attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 711–742. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.43.020192.003431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ling, S., & Carrasco, M. (2006). Sustained and transient covert attention enhance the signal via different contrast response functions. Vision Research, 46, 1210–1220. doi:10.1038/nn1761PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Luh, K. E., Redl, J., & Levy, J. (1994). Left- and right-handers see people differently: Free-vision perceptual asymmetries for chimeric stimuli. Brain & Cognition, 25, 141–160. doi:10.1006/brcg.1994.1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mesulam, M. M. (1999). Spatial attention and neglect: Parietal, frontal and cingulate contributions to the mental representation and attentional targeting of salient extrapersonal events. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 354, 1325–1346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Montagna, B., Pestilli, F., & Carrasco, M. (2009). Attention trades off spatial acuity. Vision Research, 49, 735–745. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2009.02.001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nakayama, K., & Mackeben, M. (1989). Sustained and transient components of focal visual attention. Vision Research, 29, 1631–1647. doi:10.1016/0042-6989(89)90144-2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Oldfield, R. C. (1971). The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia, 9, 97–113. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Oosterhof, N. N., & Todorov, A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 11087–11092. doi:10.1073/pnas.0805664105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pestilli, F., & Carrasco, M. (2005). Attention enhances contrast sensitivity at cued and impairs it at uncued locations. Vision Research, 45, 1867–1875. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2005.01.019PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Phelps, E. A., Ling, S., & Carrasco, M. (2006). Emotion facilitates perception and potentiates the perceptual benefits of attention. Psychological Science, 17, 292–299. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01701.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Raymond, M., Pontier, D., Dufour, A., & Møller, A. P. (1996). Frequency-dependent maintenance of left-handedness in humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 263, 1627–1633.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rhodes, G. (1985). Lateralized processes in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 249–271.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rubichi, S., & Nicoletti, R. (2006). The Simon effect and handedmay ness: Evidence for a dominant-hand attentional bias in spatial coding. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 1059–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Siman-Tov, T., Mendelsohn, A., Schonberg, T., Avidan, G., Podlipsky, I., Pessoa, L., et al. (2007). Bihemispheric leftward bias in a visuospatial attention-related network. Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 11271–11278. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0599-07.2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wichmann, F. A., & Hill, N. J. (2001). The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 1293–1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yovel, G., Levy, J., Grabowecky, M., & Paller, K. A. (2003). Neural correlates of the left-visual-field superiority in face perception appear at multiple stages of face processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 462–474. doi:10.1162/089892903321593162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yovel, G., Tambini, A., & Brandman, T. (2008). The asymmetry of the fusiform face area is a stable individual characteristic that underlies the left-visual-field superiority for faces. Neuropsychologia, 46, 3061–3068. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.06.017PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emma Ferneyhough
    • 1
  • Damian A. Stanley
    • 1
  • Elizabeth A. Phelps
    • 1
  • Marisa Carrasco
    • 1
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentNew York UniversityNew York

Personalised recommendations