Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interhemispheric Difference for Upright and Inverted Face Perception in Humans: An Event-Related Potential Study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Brain Topography Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) to investigate the interhemispheric difference of the N170 component for upright and inverted face perception in detail in fifteen healthy subjects. This is the first ERP study focusing on interhemispheric differences for face perception by showing faces in the hemifield. The face inversion effect, the prolonged latency and enhanced amplitude were found in both hemispheres. We found that the peak latency of the N170 following both upright and inverted face stimulation showed no significant difference between each hemisphere, though the N170 latency for the inverted face in the left hemisphere was shorter than that in the right hemisphere. The N170 recorded from the hemisphere ipsilateral to the stimulated hemifield showed unique findings. The interhemispheric time difference of the N170 between the right and the left hemispheres when the inverted face was presented in the left hemifield was significantly shorter than in the other three conditions. This unique finding may indicate that the conduction time from the right to the left for inverted face perception is faster than the other conditions, or that the left hemisphere specifically processed the inverted face very rapidly after receiving signals from the right hemisphere. If the N170 was generated by some, at least two, temporally overlapping activities, the different style of a summation of these activities may cause the unique findings found in this study. In conclusion, by presenting face stimuli in the hemifields, we could identify several new findings regarding the N170 component related to the face inversion effect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yin RK. Looking at upside-down faces. J Exp Psychol 1969;81:141–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Valentine T. Upside-down faces: a review of the effect of inversion upon face recognition. Br J Psychol 1988;79:471–91

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Farah MJ, Tanaka JW, Drain HM. What causes the face inversion effect? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1995;21:628–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Farah MJ, Wilson KD, Drain HM, Tanaka JR. The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms. Vision Res 1995;35:2089–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Le Grand R, Mondloch CJ, Maurer D, Brent HP. Expert face processing requires visual input to the right hemisphere during infancy. Nat Neurosci 2003;6:1108–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rossion B, Delvenne JF, Debatisse D, Goffaux V, Bruyer R, Crommelinck M, et al. Spatio-temporal localization of the face inversion effect: an event-related potentials study. Biol Psychol 1999;50:173–89

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rossion B, Gauthier I, Tarr MJ, Despland P, Bruyer R, Linotte S, et al. The N170 occipito-temporal component is delayed and enhanced to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face-specific processes in the human brain. Neuroreport 2000;11:69–74

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rossion B, Gauthier I, Goffaux V, Tarr MJ, Crommelinck M. Expertise training with novel objects leads to left-lateralized facelike electrophysiological responses. Psychol Sci 2002;13:250–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. Inversion and contrast polarity reversal affect both encoding and recognition processes of unfamiliar faces: a repetition study using ERPs. Neuroimage 2002;15:353–72

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. Effects of repetition learning on upright, inverted and contrast-reversed face processing using ERPs. Neuroimage 2004;21:1518–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. Source analysis of the N170 to faces and objects. Neuroreport 2004;15:1261–5

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Itier RJ, Latinus M, Taylor MJ. Face, eye and object early processing: What is the face specificity? Neuroimage 2006;29: 667–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eimer M. The face-specific N170 component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces. Neuroreport 2000;11:2319–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Aguirre GK, Singh R, D’Esposito M. Stimulus inversion and the responses of face and object-sensitive cortical areas. Neuroreport 1999;10:189–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Haxby JV, Ungerleider LG, Clark VP, Schouten JL, Hoffman EA, Martin A. The effect of face inversion on activity in human neural systems for face and object perception. Neuron 1999;22:189–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Kanwisher N, Tong F, Nakayama K. The effect of face inversion on the human fusiform face area. Cognition 1998;68:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yovel G, Kanwisher N. Face perception: domain specific, not process specific. Neuron 2004;44:889–98

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Mazard A, Schiltz C, Rossion B. Recovery from adaptation to facial identity is larger for upright than inverted faces in the human occipito-temporal cortex. Neuropsychologia 2006;44: 912–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Burt DM, Perrett DI. Perceptual asymmetries in judgments of facial attractiveness, age, gender, speech and expression. Neuropsychologia 1997;35:685–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ricciardelli P, Ro T, Driver J. A left visual field advantage in perception of gaze direction. Neuropsychogia 2002;40:769–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Wada Y, Yamamoto T. Selective impairment of facial recognition due to a haematoma restricted to the right fusiform and lateral occipital region. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 2001;71: 254–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Gazzaniga MS, Smylie CS. Facial recognition and brain asymmetries: clues to underlying mechanisms. Ann Neurol 1983;13:536–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun MM. The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. J Neurosci 1997;17:4302–11

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. McCarthy G, Puce A, Gore JC, Allison T. Face-specific processing in the human fusiform gyrus. J Cogn Neurosci 1997;9:605–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sagiv N, Bentin S. Structural encoding of human and schematic faces: holistic and part-based processes. J Cogn Neurosci 2001;13:937–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Yovel G, Levy J, Grabowecky M, Paller KA. Neural correlates of the left-visual-field superiority in face perception appear at multiple stages of face processing. J Cogn Neurosci 2003;15:462–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Watanabe S, Kakigi R, Koyama S, Kirino E. Human face perception traced by magneto- and electro-encephalography. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 1999;8:125–42

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Watanabe S, Kakigi R, Koyama S, Kirino E. It takes longer to recognize the eyes than the whole face in humans. Neuroreport 1999;10:2193–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Terasaki O, Okazaki M. Transcallosal conduction time measured by visual hemifield stimulation with face images. Neuroreport 2002;13:97–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. McCarthy G, Puce A, Belger A, Allison T. Electrophysiological studies of human face perception. II. Response properties of face-specific potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex. Cereb Cortex 1999;9:431–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Watanabe S, Kakigi R, Puce A. The spatiotemporal dynamics of the face inversion effect: a magneto- and electro- encephalographic study. Neuroscience 2003;116:879–95

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Itier RJ, Herdman AT, George N, Cheyne D, Taylor M. Inversion and contrast-reversal effects on face processing assessed by MEG. Brain Res 2006;1115:108–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Watanabe S, Miki K, Kakigi R. Gaze direction affects face perception in humans. Neurosci Lett 2002;325:163–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bentin S, Allison T, Puce A, Perez E, McCarthy G. Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans. J Cogn Neurosci 1996;8:551–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Taylor MJ, McCarthy G, Saliba E, Degiovanni E. ERP evidence of developmental changes in processing of faces. Clin Neurophysiol 1999;110:910–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. N170 or N1? Spatiotemporal differences between object and face processing using ERPs. Cereb Cortex 2004;14:132–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dr. S. Ojima at the Faculty of Humanities, Tokyo Metropolitan University for suggestions, and to Mr. Y. Takeshima and Mr. O. Nagata at the National Institute for Physiological Sciences for technical support. This study was supported by RISTEX, Japan Science and Technology Agency, Japan, the Japan Space Forum, and a Grant-in-aid for Scientific Research on Priority Areas, Integrative Brain Research from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (No. 17021042).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Integrative Physiology, National Institute for Physiological Sciences, Myodaiji, Okazaki, 444-8585, Japan

    Yukiko Honda, Shoko Watanabe, Maiko Nakamura, Kensaku Miki & Ryusuke Kakigi

  2. Department of Physiological Sciences, School of Life Sciences, The Graduate University for Advanced Studies, Hayama, Kanagawa, Japan

    Yukiko Honda & Ryusuke Kakigi

  3. Department of Neurology, Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

    Maiko Nakamura

  4. RISTEX, Japan Science and Technology Agency, Tokyo, Japan

    Ryusuke Kakigi

Authors
  1. Yukiko Honda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shoko Watanabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maiko Nakamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kensaku Miki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ryusuke Kakigi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shoko Watanabe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Honda, Y., Watanabe, S., Nakamura, M. et al. Interhemispheric Difference for Upright and Inverted Face Perception in Humans: An Event-Related Potential Study. Brain Topogr 20, 31–39 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-007-0028-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10548-007-0028-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation