Boundary Extension in Face Processing

Boundary extension is a common false memory error, in which people confidently remember seeing a wider angle view of the scene than was viewed. Previous research found that boundary extension is scene-specific and did not examine this phenomenon in nonscenes. The present research explored boundary e...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Olesya Blazhenkova
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2017-08-01
Series:i-Perception
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669517724808
id doaj-ee8a3fe6229043c1b45251b486550fc1
record_format Article
spelling doaj-ee8a3fe6229043c1b45251b486550fc12020-11-25T04:01:00ZengSAGE Publishingi-Perception2041-66952017-08-01810.1177/2041669517724808Boundary Extension in Face ProcessingOlesya BlazhenkovaBoundary extension is a common false memory error, in which people confidently remember seeing a wider angle view of the scene than was viewed. Previous research found that boundary extension is scene-specific and did not examine this phenomenon in nonscenes. The present research explored boundary extension in cropped face images. Participants completed either a short-term or a long-term condition of the task. During the encoding, they observed photographs of faces, cropped either in a forehead or in a chin area, and subsequently performed face recognition through a forced-choice selection. The recognition options represented different degrees of boundary extension and boundary restriction errors. Eye-tracking and performance data were collected. The results demonstrated boundary extension in both memory conditions. Furthermore, previous literature reported the asymmetry in amounts of expansion at different sides of an image. The present work provides the evidence of asymmetry in boundary extension. In the short-term condition, boundary extension errors were more pronounced for forehead, than for chin face areas. Finally, this research examined the relationships between the measures of boundary extension, imagery, and emotion. The results suggest that individual differences in emotional ability and object, but not spatial, imagery could be associated with boundary extension in face processing.https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669517724808
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Olesya Blazhenkova
spellingShingle Olesya Blazhenkova
Boundary Extension in Face Processing
i-Perception
author_facet Olesya Blazhenkova
author_sort Olesya Blazhenkova
title Boundary Extension in Face Processing
title_short Boundary Extension in Face Processing
title_full Boundary Extension in Face Processing
title_fullStr Boundary Extension in Face Processing
title_full_unstemmed Boundary Extension in Face Processing
title_sort boundary extension in face processing
publisher SAGE Publishing
series i-Perception
issn 2041-6695
publishDate 2017-08-01
description Boundary extension is a common false memory error, in which people confidently remember seeing a wider angle view of the scene than was viewed. Previous research found that boundary extension is scene-specific and did not examine this phenomenon in nonscenes. The present research explored boundary extension in cropped face images. Participants completed either a short-term or a long-term condition of the task. During the encoding, they observed photographs of faces, cropped either in a forehead or in a chin area, and subsequently performed face recognition through a forced-choice selection. The recognition options represented different degrees of boundary extension and boundary restriction errors. Eye-tracking and performance data were collected. The results demonstrated boundary extension in both memory conditions. Furthermore, previous literature reported the asymmetry in amounts of expansion at different sides of an image. The present work provides the evidence of asymmetry in boundary extension. In the short-term condition, boundary extension errors were more pronounced for forehead, than for chin face areas. Finally, this research examined the relationships between the measures of boundary extension, imagery, and emotion. The results suggest that individual differences in emotional ability and object, but not spatial, imagery could be associated with boundary extension in face processing.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2041669517724808
work_keys_str_mv AT olesyablazhenkova boundaryextensioninfaceprocessing
_version_ 1724448094422040576