F

FACE-GOBLET/FACE-VASE/REVERSIBLE GOBLET ILLUSION. See APPENDIX A, RUBIN FIGURE/ILLUSION.

FACE RECOGNITION/FACIAL IDENTITY THEORY. The various models and theories of face-recognition and facial identity attempt to explain the different types of information that is extracted from the faces one sees in the world. In one integrative approach, the Bruce-Young functional model of face recognition, it is proposed that three of the major aspects of face perception - recognition of facial identity, recognition of facial expression, and recognition of facial speech - are all independently achieved by the perceiver. According to this model, one does not have to recognize a person's identity in order to be able to "speech-read" their lips and, at an intuitive level, information extracted from a face that allowed it to be classified as "familiar" would not be the same as that which needs to be extracted for making use of facial speech cues. Evidence supporting such a face-recognition model of functional organization comes primarily from two sources: experiments carried out on "normal" participants where one kind of performance is affected, while there is little or no effect on another; and data from "brain-damaged" patients where different patterns of selective impairment of different face-processing tasks are reported. Essentially, in a number of reports, the independence of facial expression and facial identity processing has been supported by converging evidence from studies with normal adults, neuropsychological dissociations, and neurophysiological recordings; moreover, independence of memory for faces and facial speech has been observed in autistic individuals. Other studies showing a double dissociation between facial speech and facial identity processing suggest that these two functions are independent where each activates a different cortical processing mechanism. However, data from yet other studies indicate that the Bruce-Young functional model of face recognition is not entirely supported regarding the notion of independence of the processing of facial speech and the processing of facial identity. See also Mc-GURK EFFECT/ILLUSION. REFERENCES

Bruce, V., & Young, A. (1986). Understanding face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 305-327. Young, A. W., Hellawell, D., & Hay, D. C.

(1987). Configurational information in face perception. Perception, 16, 747-759.

FACIAL FEEDBACK HYPOTHESIS. This hypothesis refers to the notion that emotional activity causes genetically-programmed alterations to occur in facial expression where the face subsequently provides cues ("feedback") to the brain that help a person to determine what emotion is being felt. In other terms, the facial feedback hypothesis states that having facial expressions and becoming aware of them are what lead to an emotional experience. Indeed, according to the facial feedback hypothesis, when people deliberately form various facial expressions, emotion-like transformations occur in their bodily activity (cf., social smile theory - posits that a smile on the face of an infant or an adult affects others in a favorable way and, hence, the behavior of smiling has survival value for the individual and the species). Thus, "making faces" can actually cause emotion. The idea that sensory feedback from one's own facial expression can influence one's emotional feeling suggests a possible mechanism through which emotional "contagion" can occur: people may automatically mimic the facial expressions of others, and then, perhaps, feedback from one's own body alters the emotions to coincide with the expressions that are being mimicked. Recently, E. Hatfield, J. Cacioppo, and R. Rap-son proposed this theory of primitive emotional contagion in which the mimicry of expressions does not involve higher cognitive processes. A considerable amount of research shows that people do automatically mimic the emotional expressions of others. The ability to synchronize emotions quickly with other people may have been an advantage in our evolu tion, and may still be today, by helping to promote our acceptance of those around us (cf., other-race face-perception effect - refers to the finding that face-recognition memory is better for faces of the same "race" that the observer belongs to, as compared to the faces of people of other "races"). Perhaps overt facial expressions of emotion, coupled with an automatic tendency to mimic those expressions, came about in evolution partly to facilitate social acceptance. See also EKMAN-FRIESEN THEORY OF EMOTIONS; EMOTIONS, THEORIES OF; IZARD'S THEORY OF EMOTIONS. REFERENCES

Meltzoff, A., & Moore, M. (1977). Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. Science, 198, 7578.

Buck, R. (1980). Nonverbal behavior and the theory of emotion: The facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 811-824.

Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and So-cialPsychology, 54, 268-272. Adelmann, P., & Zajonc, R. (1989). Facial efference and the experience of emotion. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 249-280. Izard, C. (1990). Facial expressions and the regulation of emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 487-498. Ekman, P. (1993). Facial expression and emotion. American Psychologist, 48, 384-392.

(1993). Emotional contagion. Madison, WI: Brown.

FACILITATION, LAW OF. See SKINNER'S DESCRIPTIVE BEHAVIOR/OPER-ANT CONDITIONING THEORY.

FACTOR THEORY. See HULL'S LEARNING THEORY.

Conquering Fear In The 21th Century

Conquering Fear In The 21th Century

The Ultimate Guide To Overcoming Fear And Getting Breakthroughs. Fear is without doubt among the strongest and most influential emotional responses we have, and it may act as both a protective and destructive force depending upon the situation.

Get My Free Ebook


Post a comment