Review articleThe problem of being bad at faces
Introduction
The definition of developmental prosopagnosia is deceptively simple: a life-long difficulty in recognizing or learning to recognize faces. When the disorder is severe it leads to anecdotes that stand apart from typical human experience: failures to recognize one’s own image in the mirror, mistaking siblings who change their hairstyle for strangers, and an inordinate reliance on voice to identify people, when for most people voices are far inferior to faces as cues to identity (Barsics and Bredart, 2012). Most would agree that subjects who describe such experiences likely have an anomalous mechanism for face recognition. However, operationalizing these impressions and translating the definition into diagnostic criteria has challenges and complexities that cannot be denied.
How is it currently done? Not surprisingly, but no less unfortunate for that, this varies considerably between studies, as can be seen in an illustrative sample of reports spanning recent years (Table 1). Some document the inability to identify famous faces by name, others poor short-term familiarity with recently viewed faces. Some include impaired discrimination between faces, although the ability to do this is no guarantee that one can recognize faces. Some require subjects to complain of problems with face recognition in daily life, and some formalize this with a questionnaire and use this in lieu of behavioural testing. Some studies require meeting only one or two of these various criteria, while others insist on fulfillment of several. Even when the same test is applied, the criterion for diagnosis varies: with the Cambridge Face Memory Test, there are studies that use 1.7 standard deviations, 2 standard deviations, or a set numerical score.
Some of the difficulties created by this diagnostic heterogeneity will be discussed later. However, a more fundamental issue with behavioural tests and questionnaires is the diagnostic inference they afford. All of these instruments claim to indicate a problem when a subject’s score falls below a certain criterion. The crux is what we can infer when that happens.
Section snippets
The normative and the pathologic view
To reflect upon this, we must consider one of the key issues about this diagnosis: its pathogenetic implication. First of all, as with any human ability, face recognition skills vary in the normal population (Bowles et al., 2009, Wilmer et al., 2010, Zhu et al., 2010), and the results of any test of these skills will reflect that variability. Thus there will be both those who never forget a face, the super-recognizers (Russell et al., 2009), and those who are bad with faces. These are
Other aids to diagnosis
Frankly, if one subscribes to the pathologic view, there is no way that one can statistically infer from the fact that someone falls below a performance criterion on any behavioural test of face recognition that they have developmental prosopagnosia rather than being ‘bad with faces’. Hence the challenge is to find some other characteristic that will separate the developmental prosopagnosic from the person bad at faces.
Are there markers in perceptual performance that could potentially segregate
Concluding remarks
Faced with these challenges, what are we to do? Others have recently grappled with this, and their suggestions are worth reviewing (Dalrymple and Palermo, 2016). We agree with them that objective confirmation of poor familiarity for faces on two or more tests seems prudent (Table 2). Most common in recent years has been the Cambridge Face Memory Test (Duchaine and Nakayama, 2006), which probes the ability to become familiar with recently viewed faces, along with a test of famous face
Acknowledgements
Brad Duchaine participated in helpful discussions about this manuscript. JB is supported by a Canada Research Chair 950-228984 and the Marianne Koerner Chair in Brain Diseases. SC is supported by National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award number F32 EY023479-02 and the Loan Repayment Program. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
References (56)
- et al.
Impaired holistic processing in congenital prosopagnosia
Neuropsychologia
(2011) - et al.
Developmental prosopagnosia: a study of three patients
Brain Cogn.
(2003) - et al.
Developmental prosopagnosia: a study of three patients
Brain Cogn.
(2003) - et al.
Selectivity in acquired prosopagnosia: the segregation of divergent and convergent operations
Neuropsychologia
(2016) - et al.
Intranasal inhalation of oxytocin improves face processing in developmental prosopagnosia
Cortex
(2014) - et al.
Getting lost: topographic skills in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia
Cortex
(2016) - et al.
Using regression to measure holistic face processing reveals a strong link with face recognition ability
Cognition
(2013) - et al.
The Cambridge Face Memory Test: results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants
Neuropsychologia
(2006) - et al.
Hereditary prosopagnosia: the first case series
Cortex
(2007) - et al.
Normal and abnormal face selectivity of the M170 response in developmental prosopagnosics
Neuropsychologia
(2005)
The perception of curvature can be selectively disrupted in prosopagnosia
Brain Cogn.
What aspects of face processing are impaired in developmental prosopagnosia?
Brain Cogn.
Three cases of developmental prosopagnosia from one family: detailed neuropsychological and psychophysical investigation of face processing
Cortex
The processing of voice identity in developmental prosopagnosia
Cortex
The activation of visual face memory and explicit face recognition are delayed in developmental prosopagnosia
Neuropsychologia
Probing short-term face memory in developmental prosopagnosia
Cortex
Local but not long-range microstructural differences of the ventral temporal cortex in developmental prosopagnosia
Neuropsychologia
Advances in developmental prosopagnosia research
Curr. Opin. Neurobiol.
Face and object imagery in congenital prosopagnosia: a case series
Cortex
Psychosocial consequences of developmental prosopagnosia: a problem of recognition
J. Psychosom. Res.
Heritability of the specific cognitive ability of face perception
Curr. Biol.
Detailed exploration of face-related processing in congenital prosopagnosia: 1. Functional neuroimaging findings
J. Cogn. Neurosci.
The autism-spectrum quotient (AQ): evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians
J. Autism Dev. Disord.
Recalling semantic information about newly learned faces and voices
Memory
Covert recognition in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia
Neurology
Detailed exploration of face-related processing in congenital prosopagnosia: 1. Behavioral findings
J. Cogn. Neurosci.
Diagnosing prosopagnosia: effects of ageing, sex, and participant-stimulus ethnic match on the Cambridge Face Memory Test and Cambridge Face Perception Test
Cogn. Neuropsychol.
Recognition memory in developmental prosopagnosia: electrophysiological evidence for abnormal routes to face recognition
Front. Hum. Neurosci.
Cited by (77)
The impact of low vision on social function: The potential importance of lost visual social cues
2023, Journal of Optometry