1. Different and common brain signals of altered neurocognitive mechanisms for unfamiliar face processing in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia
- Author
-
Ela I. Olivares, Jaime Iglesias, Ana S. Urraca, Agustin Lage-Castellanos, Audition, and RS: FPN CN 2
- Subjects
Male ,Diagnostic information ,Cognitive Neuroscience ,Acquired prosopagnosia ,Posterior parietal cortex ,EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS ,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology ,050105 experimental psychology ,Unfamiliar faces ,03 medical and health sciences ,Source reconstruction ,WORKING-MEMORY ,0302 clinical medicine ,Face processing ,Biological neural network ,Humans ,ANATOMIC BASIS ,0501 psychology and cognitive sciences ,Developmental prosopagnosia ,ELECTROMAGNETIC TOMOGRAPHY ,05 social sciences ,Neuropsychology ,Brain ,Bayes Theorem ,Recognition, Psychology ,ERPs ,ERP EVIDENCE ,SOURCE RECONSTRUCTION ,Prosopagnosia ,Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology ,EXTERNAL FEATURES ,Pattern Recognition, Visual ,Face (geometry) ,FAMILIAR FACES ,INTERNAL FEATURES ,Female ,CONGENITAL PROSOPAGNOSIA ,Psychology ,Facial Recognition ,Face structure ,Neuroscience ,Neurocognitive ,Photic Stimulation ,030217 neurology & neurosurgery - Abstract
Neuropsychological studies have shown that prosopagnosic individuals perceive face structure in an atypical way. This might preclude the formation of appropriate face representations and, consequently, hamper effective recognition. The present ERP study, in combination with Bayesian source reconstruction, investigates how information related to both external (E) and internal (I) features was processed by E.C. and I.P., suffering from acquired and developmental prosopagnosia, respectively. They carried out a face-feature matching task with new faces. E.C. showed poor performance and remarkable lack of early face-sensitive P1, N170 and P2 responses on right (damaged) posterior cortex. Although she presented the expected mismatch effect to target faces in the E-I sequence, it was of shorter duration than in Controls, and involved left parietal, right frontocentral and dorsofrontal regions, suggestive of reduced neural circuitry to process face configurations. In turn, I.P. performed efficiently but with a remarkable bias to give “match” responses. His face-sensitive potentials P1–N170 were comparable to those from Controls, however, he showed no subsequent P2 response and a mismatch effect only in the I-E sequence, reflecting activation confined to those regions that sustain typically the initial stages of face processing. Relevantly, neither of the prosopagnosics exhibited conspicuous P3 responses to features acting as primes, indicating that diagnostic information for constructing face representations could not be sufficiently attended nor deeply encoded. Our findings suggest a different locus for altered neurocognitive mechanisms in the face network in participants with different types of prosopagnosia, but common indicators of a deficient allocation of attentional resources for further recognition.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF