Synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features
Abstract We asked how dynamic facial features are perceptually grouped. To address this question, we varied the timing of mouth movements relative to eyebrow movements, while measuring the detectability of a small temporal misalignment between a pair of oscillating eyebrows—an eyebrow wave. We found...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Nature Publishing Group
2021-03-01
|
Series: | Scientific Reports |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-86725-x |
id |
doaj-22c7c8c93e3a48a2b2a4c2aebabd0af1 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-22c7c8c93e3a48a2b2a4c2aebabd0af12021-04-04T11:30:20ZengNature Publishing GroupScientific Reports2045-23222021-03-0111111010.1038/s41598-021-86725-xSynchronous facial action binds dynamic facial featuresAlan Johnston0Ben B. Brown1Ryan Elson2School of Psychology, University Park, The University of NottinghamSchool of Psychology, University Park, The University of NottinghamSchool of Psychology, University Park, The University of NottinghamAbstract We asked how dynamic facial features are perceptually grouped. To address this question, we varied the timing of mouth movements relative to eyebrow movements, while measuring the detectability of a small temporal misalignment between a pair of oscillating eyebrows—an eyebrow wave. We found eyebrow wave detection performance was worse for synchronous movements of the eyebrows and mouth. Subsequently, we found this effect was specific to stimuli presented to the right visual field, implicating the involvement of left lateralised visual speech areas. Adaptation has been used as a tool in low-level vision to establish the presence of separable visual channels. Adaptation to moving eyebrows and mouths with various relative timings reduced eyebrow wave detection but only when the adapting mouth and eyebrows moved asynchronously. Inverting the face led to a greater reduction in detection after adaptation particularly for asynchronous facial motion at test. We conclude that synchronous motion binds dynamic facial features whereas asynchronous motion releases them, allowing adaptation to impair eyebrow wave detection.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-86725-x |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Alan Johnston Ben B. Brown Ryan Elson |
spellingShingle |
Alan Johnston Ben B. Brown Ryan Elson Synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features Scientific Reports |
author_facet |
Alan Johnston Ben B. Brown Ryan Elson |
author_sort |
Alan Johnston |
title |
Synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features |
title_short |
Synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features |
title_full |
Synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features |
title_fullStr |
Synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features |
title_full_unstemmed |
Synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features |
title_sort |
synchronous facial action binds dynamic facial features |
publisher |
Nature Publishing Group |
series |
Scientific Reports |
issn |
2045-2322 |
publishDate |
2021-03-01 |
description |
Abstract We asked how dynamic facial features are perceptually grouped. To address this question, we varied the timing of mouth movements relative to eyebrow movements, while measuring the detectability of a small temporal misalignment between a pair of oscillating eyebrows—an eyebrow wave. We found eyebrow wave detection performance was worse for synchronous movements of the eyebrows and mouth. Subsequently, we found this effect was specific to stimuli presented to the right visual field, implicating the involvement of left lateralised visual speech areas. Adaptation has been used as a tool in low-level vision to establish the presence of separable visual channels. Adaptation to moving eyebrows and mouths with various relative timings reduced eyebrow wave detection but only when the adapting mouth and eyebrows moved asynchronously. Inverting the face led to a greater reduction in detection after adaptation particularly for asynchronous facial motion at test. We conclude that synchronous motion binds dynamic facial features whereas asynchronous motion releases them, allowing adaptation to impair eyebrow wave detection. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-86725-x |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT alanjohnston synchronousfacialactionbindsdynamicfacialfeatures AT benbbrown synchronousfacialactionbindsdynamicfacialfeatures AT ryanelson synchronousfacialactionbindsdynamicfacialfeatures |
_version_ |
1721542628074323968 |