title: Information-processing alternatives to holistic perception: identifying the mechanisms of secondary-level holism within a categorization paradigm.
abstract: Failure to selectively attend to a facial feature, in the part-to-whole paradigm, has been taken as evidence of holistic perception in a large body of face perception literature. In this article, we demonstrate that although failure of selective attention is a necessary property of holistic perception, its presence alone is not sufficient to conclude holistic processing has occurred. One must also consider the cognitive properties that are a natural part of information-processing systems, namely, mental architecture (serial, parallel), a stopping rule (self-terminating, exhaustive), and process dependency. We demonstrate that an analytic model (nonholistic) based on a parallel mental architecture and a self-terminating stopping rule can predict failure of selective attention. The new insights in our approach are based on the systems factorial technology, which provides a rigorous means of identifying the holistic-analytic distinction. Our main goal in the study was to compare potential changes in architecture when 2 second-order relational facial features are manipulated across different face contexts. Supported by simulation data, we suggest that the critical concept for modeling holistic perception is the interactive dependency between features. We argue that without conducting tests for architecture, stopping rule, and dependency, apparent holism could be confounded with analytic perception. This research adds to the list of converging operations for distinguishing between analytic forms and holistic forms of face perception.
authors.affiliation: Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Lentzeallee 94, Berlin, Germany. fific@mpib-berlin.mpg.de
authors.forename: Mario
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Fifić
authors.forename: James T
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Townsend
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology*; D003071:Cognition / Q000502:physiology; D005145:Face; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011340:Problem Solving / Q000502:physiology; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D021641:Recognition, Psychology / Q000502:physiology*; D014796:Visual Perception / Q000502:physiology*
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1991 Oct;50(4):367-72
references.pmid: 1758768
references.citation: Perception. 1994;23(1):65-74
references.pmid: 7936977
references.citation: Perception. 1988;17(1):43-63
references.pmid: 3205669
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol A. 2005 Feb;58(2):235-50
references.pmid: 15903116
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1986 Apr;93(2):154-79
references.pmid: 3714926
references.citation: Cognition. 2010 Feb;114(2):129-50
references.pmid: 19733840
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1998 Jul;105(3):482-98
references.pmid: 9697428
references.citation: Cognition. 2004 Aug;93(1):B1-9
references.pmid: 15110726
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Jun;11(3):391-418
references.pmid: 15376788
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2004 Aug;66(6):953-62
references.pmid: 15675643
references.citation: Perception. 1984;13(5):505-12
references.pmid: 6535975
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1985 Jul;11(3):538-64
references.pmid: 3160815
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1997 Jul;59(5):752-61
references.pmid: 9259642
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2006 Jun;32(3):755-79
references.pmid: 16822136
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008 Apr;34(2):356-75
references.pmid: 18377176
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 Sep;28(5):872-92
references.pmid: 12219796
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2000 Jun;7(2):208-56
references.pmid: 10909132
references.citation: Cogn Neuropsychol. 2000 Feb 1;17(1):201-19
references.pmid: 20945180
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1997 Sep;25(5):583-92
references.pmid: 9337578
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008 Dec;34(6):1441-63
references.pmid: 19045985
references.citation: Perception. 1999;28(3):341-59
references.pmid: 10615472
references.citation: J Math Psychol. 2010 Feb;54(1):53-72
references.pmid: 23750050
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2008 Dec;34(6):1372-88
references.pmid: 19045981
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol A. 2000 May;53(2):513-36
references.pmid: 10881616
references.citation: Atten Percept Psychophys. 2009 Apr;71(3):530-40
references.pmid: 19304644
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2004 Oct;111(4):1003-35
references.pmid: 15482071
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2007 Jan;114(1):71-103
references.pmid: 17227182
references.citation: Perception. 1987;16(6):747-59
references.pmid: 3454432
references.citation: J Exp Child Psychol. 2003 Sep;86(1):67-84
references.pmid: 12943617
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1976 Mar;4(2):176-85
references.pmid: 21287021
references.citation: Perception. 2000;29(2):159-70
references.pmid: 10820599
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1991 May;17(2):551-60
references.pmid: 1830092
references.citation: Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2002 Mar;1(1):63-75
references.pmid: 17715586
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Nov;34(6):1356-68
references.pmid: 18980400
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2002 Jun 1;6(6):255-260
references.pmid: 12039607
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1995 Jun;21(3):628-34
references.pmid: 7790837
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1996 Aug;22(4):904-15
references.pmid: 8756958
references.citation: Br J Psychol. 1984 May;75 ( Pt 2):221-42
references.pmid: 6733396
references.citation: Acta Psychol (Amst). 1990 Apr;73(3):225-43
references.pmid: 2353588
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol A. 1998 Aug;51(3):449-73
references.pmid: 9745377
references.citation: Perception. 2004;33(4):387-98
references.pmid: 15222387
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2001 Apr;63(3):423-35
references.pmid: 11414130
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1993 Jul;25(3):281-316
references.pmid: 8354050
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1956 Mar;53(2):134-40
references.pmid: 13297917
references.citation: Neural Comput. 2008 Apr;20(4):873-922
references.pmid: 18085991
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2010 Apr;117(2):309-48
references.pmid: 20438229
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1973 Jan;80(1):53-68
references.pmid: 4689203
references.citation: Ergonomics. 1970 Jan;13(1):37-58
references.pmid: 5416868
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2008 May;70(4):583-603
references.pmid: 18556921
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2005 Jan;67(1):14-35
references.pmid: 15912870
references.citation: Br J Psychol. 2008 Feb;99(Pt 1):45-56
references.pmid: 17535471
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Mar;34(2):328-42
references.pmid: 18315409
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2001 May;63(4):625-50
references.pmid: 11436734
references.citation: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Mar 27;364(1518):833-43
references.pmid: 19073478
references.citation: Perception. 2001;30(1):73-83
references.pmid: 11257979
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003 Nov;29(6):1106-18
references.pmid: 14622050
references.citation: Cogn Sci. 2007 Sep 10;31(5):911-24
references.pmid: 21635322
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol A. 1993 May;46(2):225-45
references.pmid: 8316637
references.citation: Perception. 1988;17(4):461-74
references.pmid: 3244519
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 1986 Jun;115(2):107-17
references.pmid: 2940312