Keywords
face recognition, neuroimaging, diagnosis, rehabilitation, object recognition
The face is a complex structure. It has a complicated three-dimensional shape, a substantial degree of mobility, and structural constraints that make all faces fairly similar; all of these issues present challenges to a perceptual system. Nevertheless, perhaps because of the social importance of faces, humans have developed the ability to recognize faces rapidly and accurately and with seemingly little effort. Indeed, recent estimates are that the typical person can remember and recognize about 5000 faces1.
However, for some people, face recognition is not so easy. Prosopagnosia is a condition marked by the loss of familiarity for faces and the consequent inability to identify people by their faces2. Although prosopagnosic subjects frequently turn to other cues such as voice, hairstyle, or anomalous facial features, these strategies have their limitations; as a result, prosopagnosic subjects still often find social situations stressful, and recent work has shown that they can suffer from anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal3,4.
Studies of prosopagnosia have a time-honoured place in research on face recognition. Neuropsychological observations have played key roles in the development of cognitive models of face processing5 and pointed to the cerebral substrates of face recognition6,7. Even in an era when advances in face research are coming from psychophysics, functional neuroimaging, and primate neurophysiology, there are still important contributions from work on prosopagnosia. This has been spurred particularly by the recognition of a developmental variant8. Although acquired prosopagnosia is rare, developmental prosopagnosia appears to be more common but debate on its exact prevalence continues9. Nevertheless, the greater availability of developmental subjects has led to an increase in the number of prosopagnosic studies. In this review, we focus on four areas of recent progress in the fields of acquired and developmental prosopagnosia.
The diagnosis of prosopagnosia
Uniform definitions are a critical starting point for research into a condition. The core defects in prosopagnosia are the loss of familiarity for previously known faces and the inability to learn to recognize new faces. In the past, this was often shown by tests using famous faces or in case studies by demonstrations that the subject could not recognize friends or family members. However, it is difficult to derive uniform diagnostic criteria from such tests. Familiarity for famous faces is affected by the subject’s age, culture, education, and interests, for example, and carefully matched controls are essential for interpreting the results of such tests. This has led to supplementation of famous face tests by the increasing use of tests that assess short-term familiarity. These show faces in a learning phase and then present these “target” faces along with new “distractor” faces in a test phase in which subjects are asked to indicate which were the faces they had learned. The most well-known examples are the Warrington Recognition Memory Test10 and the Cambridge Face Memory Test11, the latter of which has the desirable feature of testing recognition across changes in pose or lighting. Compared with tests that use famous or personally known faces, tests of short-term familiarity provide limited exposure and lack the semantic and perceptual richness of long experience but have the advantage of uniformity in the degree of learning and testing. For the Cambridge Face Memory Test, there has also been substantial normative work showing good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha ranges from 0.83 to 0.89) and no effects of intelligence or the ethnic mix of faces in the subject’s life experience. There is a very modest advantage for women but a more significant effect of age in that accuracy declines for those over the age of 5011–13. Also, versions of this test have been developed for use in children14.
There are many other tests of face processing and these were recently reviewed in detail and categorized15. Diagnostic tests can be divided into three main types: (a) tests of face perception, which can include detecting faces in arrays or discriminating or matching simultaneously seen faces; (b) tests of face recognition, such as the tests for short- and long-term familiarity which were discussed above; and (c) tests of face identification, which involve naming or providing other information learned about the person whose face is shown. Prosopagnosic subjects are impaired on both recognition and identification. Performance on tests of face perception can be used to differentiate between prosopagnosic subjects who have an apperceptive variant, in which there is an under-specification of facial structure by perceptual processing, or an associative or amnestic variant, in which the problem is not perception but the ability of perceptual information to access facial memories16. Examples of tests assessing face perception are the Benton Facial Recognition Test17, the Cambridge Face Perception Test18, the Glasgow Face Matching Test19, and the Caledonian Face Test20. Tests of face imagery have also been used to clarify the status of facial memories and diagnose the amnestic variant21.
Self-report questionnaires are becoming more common tools in diagnosing prosopagnosia. They are quick and easy, do not require equipment, do not need to be done in person and hence can be used to screen a large number of subjects, even at a distance. Among those are the Kennerknecht 15-item questionnaire22, the 20-item Prosopagnosia Index23, and the Cambridge Face Memory Questionnaire24. A potential concern is that individuals may have only modest insight into their face recognition abilities25,26, particularly children27, although some studies suggest that this might not be the case for adults using the Prosopagnosia Index28,29. This concern might account for the fact that questionnaires may have high reliability but only modest sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing prosopagnosia24. Because of these concerns, some have advocated that questionnaires always be supplemented by objective tests for diagnosis9,24,30.
Recent reviews have discussed how to incorporate these various instruments into a diagnostic approach. This may be less of an issue for acquired prosopagnosia, in which the combination of an appropriate lesion on imaging, the subject’s awareness of a change in face recognition after lesion onset, and poor performance on an objective test of face recognition makes the diagnosis plausible. For developmental prosopagnosia, there are no definite structural or genetic markers at present and so its diagnosis still rests solely on behavioural tests. One review pointed out the wide variations between studies in the types of tests, the number of tests, and the statistical cutoffs used9. This creates variable confidence in the diagnosis and introduces heterogeneity that can confound comparisons across groups and studies, an obstacle to scientific progress. As a result, there have been proposals for more uniform diagnostic criteria9,31. These include (i) subjective difficulty recognizing faces in daily life; (ii) objectively impaired face recognition on at least two tests of face recognition and criteria of at least 2 standard deviations below control means; (iii) intact general perceptual and memory function; and (iv) exclusion of other disorders associated with impaired face recognition, such as autism spectrum disorders.
Although reaching a firm diagnosis of developmental prosopagnosia has its hurdles, a recent study using qualitative methods suggested that screening for it may be possible with a simple list of 16 “hallmark symptoms” from experiences in daily life, which anyone can review27. The utility and sensitivity of this approach need to be explored.
The neural basis of prosopagnosia
The older literature has shown that lesions of acquired prosopagnosia are bilateral6,7 or limited to the right hemisphere32,33, and reports of left-sided lesions alone are rare34–36. This is consistent with evidence from functional neuroimaging that face processing induces greater activation in the right hemisphere37. The areas involved are the ventral occipito-temporal and fusiform cortex or anterior temporal cortex or both. These anatomic variants may correspond to functional variants16. Individuals with occipito-temporal or fusiform lesions are more likely to have an apperceptive variant38, whereas those with anterior temporal lesions have an amnestic variant along with better perceptual function and more difficulty with face imagery39.
Although by definition subjects with developmental prosopagnosia do not have large visible lesions, the status of their face processing networks can be studied with more subtle neuroimaging techniques, including measures of cortical thickness, the degree of functional activation, and connectivity within the network. The results as they currently stand are not conclusive. There are two main views. One proposes that developmental prosopagnosia is marked by alterations in various regions of the face network, particularly the fusiform gyrus, changes such as reduced cortical thickness or density40,41, reduced face selectivity of their activation40,42–44, local white matter abnormalities on diffusion imaging45,46, or reduced feedforward connectivity from early visual to occipito-temporal cortex47. The second proposes a disconnection between posterior and anterior regions within the face network48,49 on the basis of observations of preserved activation of the fusiform and ventral occipito-temporal cortex by faces50–52 and abnormalities in long white matter tracts that link posterior and anterior temporal cortex53,54.
Comparisons with other developmental disorders might be informative. Researchers on dyslexia have suggested a model in which a general risk for cortical anomalies is modulated by other genetic and/or environmental factors that determine the location and extent of such anomalies55. The latter determines the specific syndrome and can explain the frequent co-association of developmental disorders. In this regard, we note recent observations of associations between congenital amusia and developmental prosopagnosia56,57. Along these lines, others have speculated that abnormal neural migration may be responsible for developmental prosopagnosia8.
Does developmental prosopagnosia have a genetic cause? Face recognition abilities show a high degree of heritability in the general population58,59, and early observations were that developmental prosopagnosia tended to run in families59–63, possibly with an autosomal dominant pattern of inheritance22,64. However, most neurodevelopmental disorders are polygenic combinations of allelic variants present in the normal population. Along these lines, a recent study of 24 subjects reported that common single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the oxytocin receptor gene are associated with developmental prosopagnosia65. These preliminary results require replication in larger samples.
Is prosopagnosia only about faces?
A long-standing controversy is whether the impaired recognition in prosopagnosia is face-specific or affects other object types. This has important theoretical implications for how object recognition is organized in the visual system. The distributed view suggests that object processing is performed by networks of visual regions, and that some of these regions are involved in the perception of several types of stimuli66–68. The modular view claims that different categories of objects—particularly faces—are processed by distinct dedicated cortical regions69–71.
Case studies of acquired prosopagnosia have produced mixed results; some reported normal recognition of exemplars of other objects72–82 and others showed impairments80,81,83–88. A recent major review89 examined 238 cases of developmental prosopagnosia in the literature. The majority of subjects had evidence of impaired object recognition, although a smaller number had reasonable evidence that object recognition was intact, given that they had both good accuracy and normal reaction times on tests. Although the authors concluded that the frequent association of face and object impairments supported a shared mechanism for recognizing faces and other objects89, the challenge for any comprehensive explanation is to account for both frequent associations and occasional dissociations. One of the most useful aspects of this review was the collection of accompanying commentaries90–104, which suggested both various hypotheses to explain this fact and methodologic limitations in the currently available data that need to be addressed in future work to allow a more definitive set of conclusions to be drawn.
A particular object type deserves comment – namely, words. One of the difficulties in comparing faces and objects is that humans have a great deal of experience and expertise with faces but such expertise cannot be assumed for other object types. Take cars, for example. A recent study found that, as a group, subjects with developmental prosopagnosia tended to score low on the Cambridge Car Recognition Test but that individual scores ranged quite widely, from excellent to poor105. However, not everyone is a car expert and variable expertise could affect recognition performance. In another group of studies, when visual car recognition scores were adjusted for car expertise, as reflected by a subject’s semantic knowledge about cars, subjects with both acquired and developmental prosopagnosia tended to perform worse than expected16,106,107.
In literate societies, visual words, in contrast to cars, are a category for which almost all subjects have considerable perceptual expertise. The “many-to-many hypothesis” proposes that face and visual word processing share and compete for neural resources in regions like the fusiform gyrus and that structural constraints cause visual words to be processed more on the left, in proximity to language processing, and faces secondarily to lateralize to the right108–111. Lateralization is incomplete, though, and functional imaging shows overlap between face- and word-activated voxels112. As a consequence, the hypothesis predicts that prosopagnosia from right lesions should be accompanied by mild reading deficits in the processing of words and that alexia from left lesions should be accompanied by mild face recognition problems108. Whereas one study of three subjects with acquired prosopagnosia did show mild word recognition deficits113, other studies of visual word processing in acquired prosopagnosia from right-sided lesions alone have not found impaired reading114,115 and the same is true for developmental prosopagnosia116–118. On the other hand, the type of processing that is performed on words and faces may differ by hemisphere. Although subjects with acquired prosopagnosia from right-sided lesions may read normally, they often have trouble recognizing handwriting or font119–121, and subjects with alexia may recognize face identity122 but have trouble with lip reading119,123,124.
Can prosopagnosia be treated?
Spontaneous resolution of acquired prosopagnosia is rare125–127, and developmental prosopagnosia is a lifelong disorder. Hence, means of improving face recognition skills in these populations are of clinical interest. But can it be done? Neuroimaging shows that face processing activates a widely distributed network, including occipito-temporal, superior temporal, anterior temporal, and inferior frontal regions in both hemispheres, though more on the right128. It is highly unlikely that acquired lesions will eliminate all components of this network; furthermore, some studies in developmental prosopagnosia continue to show activation of this network by faces50–52. The open question is whether surviving components of the face network in a given prosopagnosic subject have any capacity for functional reorganization or modulation that could allow face recognition to improve through a rehabilitative approach129.
Most work has focused on behavioural interventions, although there is one intriguing report of transient improvement of developmental prosopagnosia after intranasal inhalation of oxytocin130. These rehabilitative attempts have been reviewed in detail129,131,132. Approaches can be divided into compensatory strategies, which aim to achieve person recognition by circumventing the face processing impairment, and remediation, which aims to improve that impairment. In terms of the process targeted, they can also be divided into those that focus on enhancing mnemonic function, which has been used in a few case studies133–135, and those that target perceptual function. As examples of the latter, a few older case studies attempted to enhance attention to facial features, though results on face recognition were variable134,136–138.
The most significant recent advances have been trials of perceptual learning in groups rather than single cases of prosopagnosia. In one study of 24 subjects with developmental prosopagnosia139, subjects learned over the course of 2 weeks to discriminate distances between facial features, namely the distance between the eyes and eyebrows or between the nose and the mouth. These “spatial relations” can be thought of as indices of the complex geometry of faces, and studies show that some people with prosopagnosia are impaired in perceiving them38. This trial found improved face perception (but only if the test faces had a similar frontal view) and some modest improvements in subjective reports of daily experience with faces. A second study of 10 subjects with acquired prosopagnosia132 used morphed faces to train subjects over the course of 11 weeks to perceive finer and finer differences in facial shape; at the same time, the study introduced irrelevant variations in the expression and viewpoint of the face. In these subjects, compared with a control condition, there was a 21% absolute increase in perceptual sensitivity to facial shape after training, which generalized over new views and expressions. Importantly, there was also a 10% increase for new faces on which subjects had not trained, indicating that subjects were acquiring new skills rather than just learning a set of faces. The effects of training were still evident 3 months later. Although some but not all subjects related anecdotes pointing to improved face recognition in daily life, future studies will require formal evaluation of real-life benefit before such methods are translated to the clinic.
These rehabilitative studies represent a starting point. Although neither training method represents a “cure”, they provide evidence that face processing can be changed in prosopagnosia. They also suggest that there may be individual differences in training potential. Further work is required to determine whether the perceptual gains from learning can be augmented further by better training design or the use of adjunctive methods to promote plasticity during learning.
Grant information
This work was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN 319129) and Canada Research Chairs (950-228984).
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
F1000 recommendedReferences
- 1.
Jenkins R, Dowsett AJ, Burton AM:
How many faces do people know?
Proc Biol Sci.
2018; 285(1888): pii: 20181319. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 2.
Corrow SL, Dalrymple KA, Barton JJ:
Prosopagnosia: current perspectives.
Eye Brain.
2016; 8: 165–75. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 3.
Yardley L, McDermott L, Pisarski S, et al.:
Psychosocial consequences of developmental prosopagnosia: a problem of recognition.
J Psychosom Res.
2008; 65(5): 445–51. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 4.
Dalrymple KA, Fletcher K, Corrow S, et al.:
"A room full of strangers every day": the psychosocial impact of developmental prosopagnosia on children and their families.
J Psychosom Res.
2014; 77(2): 144–50. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 5.
Bruce V, Young A:
Understanding face recognition.
Br J Psychol.
1986; 77(Pt 3): 305–27. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 6.
Meadows JC:
The anatomical basis of prosopagnosia.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.
1974; 37(5): 489–501. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 7.
Damasio AR, Damasio H, Van Hoesen GW:
Prosopagnosia: anatomic basis and behavioral mechanisms.
Neurology.
1982; 32(4): 331–41. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 8.
Susilo T, Duchaine B:
Advances in developmental prosopagnosia research.
Curr Opin Neurobiol.
2013; 23(3): 423–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 9.
Barton JJS, Corrow SL:
The problem of being bad at faces.
Neuropsychologia.
2016; 89: 119–24. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 10.
Warrington EK:
Recognition Memory Test:(Faces). Test Booklet 2a: Nfer-Nelson; 1984. Reference Source
- 11.
Duchaine B, Nakayama K:
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; 44(4): 576–85. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 12.
Bowles DC, McKone E, Dawel A, et al.:
Diagnosing prosopagnosia: effects of ageing, sex, and participant-stimulus ethnic match on the Cambridge Face Memory Test and Cambridge Face Perception Test.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2009; 26(5): 423–55. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 13.
Herzmann G, Danthiir V, Schacht A, et al.:
Toward a comprehensive test battery for face cognition: assessment of the tasks.
Behav Res Methods.
2008; 40(3): 840–57. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 14.
Croydon A, Pimperton H, Ewing L, et al.:
The Cambridge Face Memory Test for Children (CFMT-C): a new tool for measuring face recognition skills in childhood.
Neuropsychologia.
2014; 62: 60–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 15.
Robotham RJ, Starrfelt R:
Tests of whole upright face processing in prosopagnosia: A literature review.
Neuropsychologia.
2018; 121: 106–21. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 16.
Davies-Thompson J, Pancaroglu R, Barton J:
Acquired prosopagnosia: structural basis and processing impairments.
Front Biosci (Elite Ed).
2014; 6: 159–74. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 17.
Benton AL, van Allen MW:
Impairment in Facial Recognition in Patients with Cerebral Disease.
Cortex.
1968; 4(4): 344–358, IN1. Publisher Full Text
- 18.
Duchaine B, Yovel G, Nakayama K:
No global processing deficit in the Navon task in 14 developmental prosopagnosics.
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci.
2007; 2(2): 104–13. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 19.
Burton AM, White D, McNeill A:
The Glasgow Face Matching Test.
Behav Res Methods.
2010; 42(1): 286–91. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 20.
Logan AJ, Wilkinson F, Wilson HR, et al.:
The Caledonian face test: A new test of face discrimination.
Vision Res.
2016; 119: 29–41. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 21.
Barton JJ, Cherkasova M:
Face imagery and its relation to perception and covert recognition in prosopagnosia.
Neurology.
2003; 61(2): 220–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 22.
Kennerknecht I, Ho NY, Wong VC:
Prevalence of hereditary prosopagnosia (HPA) in Hong Kong Chinese population.
Am J Med Genet A.
2008; 146A(22): 2863–70. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 23.
Shah P, Gaule A, Sowden S, et al.:
The 20-item prosopagnosia index (PI20): a self-report instrument for identifying developmental prosopagnosia.
R Soc Open Sci.
2015; 2(6): 140343. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 24.
Arizpe JM, Saad E, Douglas AO, et al.:
Self-reported face recognition is highly valid, but alone is not highly discriminative of prosopagnosia-level performance on objective assessments.
Behav Res Methods.
2019. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 25.
Bindemann M, Attard J, Johnston RA, et al.:
Perceived ability and actual recognition accuracy for unfamiliar and famous faces.
Cogent Psychol.
2014; 1(1): 735. Publisher Full Text
- 26.
Palermo R, Rossion B, Rhodes G, et al.:
Do people have insight into their face recognition abilities?
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove).
2017; 70(2): 218–33. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 27.
Murray E, Hills PJ, Bennetts RJ, et al.:
Identifying Hallmark Symptoms of Developmental Prosopagnosia for Non-Experts.
Sci Rep.
2018; 8: 1690. Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 28.
Shah P, Sowden S, Gaule A, et al.:
The 20 item prosopagnosia index (PI20): relationship with the Glasgow face-matching test.
R Soc Open Sci.
2015; 2(11): 150305. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 29.
Livingston LA, Shah P:
People with and without prosopagnosia have insight into their face recognition ability.
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove).
2018; 71(5): 1260–2. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 30.
Duchaine B:
Comment on prevalence of hereditary prosopagnosia (HPA) in Hong Kong Chinese population.
Am J Med Genet A.
2008; 146A(22): 2860–2. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 31.
Dalrymple KA, Palermo R:
Guidelines for studying developmental prosopagnosia in adults and children.
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci.
2016; 7(1): 73–87. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 32.
De Renzi E:
Prosopagnosia in two patients with CT scan evidence of damage confined to the right hemisphere.
Neuropsychologia.
1986; 24(3): 385–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 33.
Landis T, Cummings JL, Christen L, et al.:
Are unilateral right posterior cerebral lesions sufficient to cause prosopagnosia? Clinical and radiological findings in six additional patients.
Cortex.
1986; 22(2): 243–52. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 34.
Mattson AJ, Levin HS, Grafman J:
A case of prosopagnosia following moderate closed head injury with left hemisphere focal lesion.
Cortex.
2000; 36(1): 125–37. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 35.
Tzavaras A, Merienne L, Masure MC:
[Prosopagnosia, amnesia and language disorders caused by left temporal lobe injury in a left-handed man]
Encephale.
1973; 62(4): 382–94. PubMed Abstract
- 36.
Barton JJ:
Prosopagnosia associated with a left occipitotemporal lesion.
Neuropsychologia.
2008; 46(8): 2214–24. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 37.
Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun MM:
The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception.
J Neurosci.
1997; 17(11): 4302–11. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 38.
Barton JJ, Press DZ, Keenan JP, et al.:
Lesions of the fusiform face area impair perception of facial configuration in prosopagnosia.
Neurology.
2002; 58(1): 71–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 39.
Barton JJ:
Structure and function in acquired prosopagnosia: lessons from a series of 10 patients with brain damage.
J Neuropsychol.
2008; 2(Pt 1): 197–225. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 40.
Dinkelacker V, Grüter M, Klaver P, et al.:
Congenital prosopagnosia: multistage anatomical and functional deficits in face processing circuitry.
J Neurol.
2011; 258(5): 770–82. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 41.
Garrido L, Furl N, Draganski B, et al.:
Voxel-based morphometry reveals reduced grey matter volume in the temporal cortex of developmental prosopagnosics.
Brain.
2009; 132(Pt 12): 3443–55. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 42.
Hadjikhani N, de Gelder B:
Neural basis of prosopagnosia: an fMRI study.
Hum Brain Mapp.
2002; 16(3): 176–82. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 43.
Jiahui G, Yang H, Duchaine B:
Developmental prosopagnosics have widespread selectivity reductions across category-selective visual cortex.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
2018; 115(28): E6418–E6427. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 44.
Furl N, Garrido L, Dolan RJ, et al.:
Fusiform gyrus face selectivity relates to individual differences in facial recognition ability.
J Cogn Neurosci.
2011; 23(7): 1723–40. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 45.
Gomez J, Pestilli F, Witthoft N, et al.:
Functionally defined white matter reveals segregated pathways in human ventral temporal cortex associated with category-specific processing.
Neuron.
2015; 85(1): 216–27. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 46.
Song S, Garrido L, Nagy Z, et al.:
Local but not long-range microstructural differences of the ventral temporal cortex in developmental prosopagnosia.
Neuropsychologia.
2015; 78: 195–206. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 47.
Lohse M, Garrido L, Driver J, et al.:
Effective Connectivity from Early Visual Cortex to Posterior Occipitotemporal Face Areas Supports Face Selectivity and Predicts Developmental Prosopagnosia.
J. Neurosci.
2016; 36(13): 3821–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 48.
Avidan G, Behrmann M:
Impairment of the face processing network in congenital prosopagnosia.
Front Biosci (Elite Ed).
2014; 6: 236–57. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 49.
Rosenthal G, Tanzer M, Simony E, et al.:
Altered topology of neural circuits in congenital prosopagnosia.
eLife.
2017; 6: pii: e25069. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 50.
Hasson U, Avidan G, Deouell LY, et al.:
Face-selective activation in a congenital prosopagnosic subject.
J Cogn Neurosci.
2003; 15(3): 419–31. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 51.
Avidan G, Hasson U, Malach R, et al.:
Detailed exploration of face-related processing in congenital prosopagnosia: 2. Functional neuroimaging findings.
J Cogn Neurosci.
2005; 17(7): 1150–67. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 52.
Avidan G, Behrmann M:
Functional MRI reveals compromised neural integrity of the face processing network in congenital prosopagnosia.
Curr Biol.
2009; 19(13): 1146–50. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 53.
Thomas C, Avidan G, Humphreys K, et al.:
Reduced structural connectivity in ventral visual cortex in congenital prosopagnosia.
Nat Neurosci.
2009; 12(1): 29–31. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 54.
Zhao Y, Zhen Z, Liu X, et al.:
The neural network for face recognition: Insights from an fMRI study on developmental prosopagnosia.
NeuroImage.
2018; 169: 151–61. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 55.
Ramus F:
Neurobiology of dyslexia: a reinterpretation of the data.
Trends Neurosci.
2004; 27(12): 720–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 56.
Corrow SL, Stubbs JL, Schlaug G, et al.:
Perception of musical pitch in developmental prosopagnosia.
Neuropsychologia.
2019; 124: 87–97. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 57.
Paquette S, Li HC, Corrow SL, et al.:
Developmental Perceptual Impairments: Cases When Tone-Deafness and Prosopagnosia Co-occur.
Front Hum Neurosci.
2018; 12: 438. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 58.
Wilmer JB, Germine L, Chabris CF, et al.:
Human face recognition ability is specific and highly heritable.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
2010; 107(11): 5238–41. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 59.
Zhu Q, Song Y, Hu S, et al.:
Heritability of the specific cognitive ability of face perception.
Curr Biol.
2010; 20(2): 137–42. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 60.
Grüter T, Grüter M, Carbon CC:
Neural and genetic foundations of face recognition and prosopagnosia.
J Neuropsychol.
2008; 2(Pt 1): 79–97. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 61.
Schmalzl L, Palermo R, Coltheart M:
Cognitive heterogeneity in genetically based prosopagnosia: a family study.
J Neuropsychol.
2008; 2(Pt 1): 99–117. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 62.
Duchaine B, Germine L, Nakayama K:
Family resemblance: ten family members with prosopagnosia and within-class object agnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2007; 24(4): 419–30. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 63.
Lee Y, Duchaine B, Wilson HR, et al.:
Three cases of developmental prosopagnosia from one family: detailed neuropsychological and psychophysical investigation of face processing.
Cortex.
2010; 46(8): 949–64. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 64.
Kennerknecht I, Grueter T, Welling B, et al.:
First report of prevalence of non-syndromic hereditary prosopagnosia (HPA).
Am J Med Genet A.
2006; 140(15): 1617–22. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 65.
Cattaneo Z, Daini R, Malaspina M, et al.:
Congenital prosopagnosia is associated with a genetic variation in the oxytocin receptor (OXTR) gene: An exploratory study.
Neuroscience.
2016; 339: 162–73. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 66.
Behrmann M, Plaut DC:
A vision of graded hemispheric specialization.
Ann N Y Acad Sci.
2015; 1359: 30–46. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 67.
O'Toole AJ, Jiang F, Abdi H, et al.:
Partially distributed representations of objects and faces in ventral temporal cortex.
J Cogn Neurosci.
2005; 17(4): 580–90. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 68.
Robinson AK, Plaut DC, Behrmann M:
Word and face processing engage overlapping distributed networks: Evidence from RSVP and EEG investigations.
J Exp Psychol Gen.
2017; 146(7): 943–61. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 69.
Kanwisher N:
The Quest for the FFA and Where It Led.
J Neurosci.
2017; 37(5): 1056–61. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 70.
McKone E, Kanwisher N:
17 Does the Human Brain Process Objects of Expertise Like Faces? A Review of the Evidence.
From monkey brain to human brain.
2005; 339. Reference Source
- 71.
McKone E, Crookes K, Jeffery L, et al.:
A critical review of the development of face recognition: experience is less important than previously believed.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2012; 29(1–2): 174–212. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 72.
Busigny T, Joubert S, Felician O, et al.:
Holistic perception of the individual face is specific and necessary: evidence from an extensive case study of acquired prosopagnosia.
Neuropsychologia.
2010; 48(14): 4057–92. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 73.
Farah MJ, Levinson KL, Klein KL:
Face perception and within-category discrimination in prosopagnosia.
Neuropsychologia.
1995; 33(6): 661–74. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 74.
Susilo T, Yovel G, Barton JJ, et al.:
Face perception is category-specific: evidence from normal body perception in acquired prosopagnosia.
Cognition.
2013; 129(1): 88–94. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 75.
Rezlescu C, Pitcher D, Duchaine B:
Acquired prosopagnosia with spared within-class object recognition but impaired recognition of degraded basic-level objects.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2012; 29(4): 325–47. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 76.
Rezlescu C, Barton JJ, Pitcher D, et al.:
Normal acquisition of expertise with greebles in two cases of acquired prosopagnosia.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A.
2014; 111(14): 5123–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 77.
Riddoch MJ, Johnston RA, Bracewell RM, et al.:
Are faces special? A case of pure prosopagnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2008; 25(1): 3–26. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 78.
McNeil JE, Warrington EK:
Prosopagnosia: a face-specific disorder.
Q J Exp Psychol A.
1993; 46(1): 1–10. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 79.
Farah MJ, Wilson KD, Drain HM, et al.:
The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms.
Vision Res.
1995; 35(14): 2089–93. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 80.
Henke K, Schweinberger SR, Grigo A, et al.:
Specificity of face recognition: recognition of exemplars of non-face objects in prosopagnosia.
Cortex.
1998; 34(2): 289–96. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 81.
Barton JJ, Cherkasova MV, Press DZ, et al.:
Perceptual functions in prosopagnosia.
Perception.
2004; 33(8): 939–56. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 82.
Schiltz C, Sorger B, Caldara R, et al.:
Impaired face discrimination in acquired prosopagnosia is associated with abnormal response to individual faces in the right middle fusiform gyrus.
Cereb Cortex.
2006; 16(4): 574–86. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 83.
Bornstein B, Sroka H, Munitz H:
Prosopagnosia with animal face agnosia.
Cortex.
1969; 5(2): 164–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 84.
De Haan EH, Campbell R:
A fifteen year follow-up of a case of developmental prosopagnosia.
Cortex.
1991; 27(4): 489–509. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 85.
Gauthier I, Behrmann M, Tarr MJ:
Can face recognition really be dissociated from object recognition?
J Cogn Neurosci.
1999; 11(4): 349–70. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 86.
Gomori AJ, Hawryluk GA:
Visual agnosia without alexia.
Neurology.
1984; 34(7): 947–50. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 87.
Newcombe F:
The processing of visual information in prosopagnosia and acquired dyslexia: Functional versus physiological interpretation.
Research in psychology and medicine.
1979; 1: 315–22.
- 88.
Bruyer R, Laterre C, Seron X, et al.:
A case of prosopagnosia with some preserved covert remembrance of familiar faces.
Brain Cogn.
1983; 2(3): 257–84. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 89.
Geskin J, Behrmann M:
Congenital prosopagnosia without object agnosia? A literature review.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 4–54. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 90.
Rossion B:
Prosopdysgnosia? What could it tell us about the neural organization of face and object recognition?
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 98–101. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 91.
Starrfelt R, Robotham RJ:
On the use of cognitive neuropsychological methods in developmental disorders.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 94–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 92.
Barton JJS:
Objects and faces, faces and objects ….
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 90–3. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 93.
de Gelder B, Van den Stock J:
Face specificity of developmental prosopagnosia, moving beyond the debate on face specificity.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 87–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 94.
Ramon M:
The power of how-lessons learned from neuropsychology and face processing.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 83–6. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 95.
Eimer M:
What do associations and dissociations between face and object recognition abilities tell us about the domain-generality of face processing?
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 80–2. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 96.
Nestor A:
Congenital prosopagnosia: Deficit diagnosis and beyond.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 78–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 97.
Rosenthal G, Avidan G:
A possible neuronal account for the behavioural heterogeneity in congenital prosopagnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 74–7. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 98.
Towler JR, Tree JJ:
Commonly associated face and object recognition impairments have implications for the cognitive architecture.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 70–3. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 99.
Gerlach C, Lissau CH, Hildebrandt NK:
On defining and interpreting dissociations.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 66–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 100.
Campbell A, Tanaka JW:
Decoupling category level and perceptual similarity in congenital prosopagnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 63–5. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 101.
Gray KLH, Cook R:
Should developmental prosopagnosia, developmental body agnosia, and developmental object agnosia be considered independent neurodevelopmental conditions?
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 59–62. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 102.
Garrido L, Duchaine B, DeGutis J:
Association vs dissociation and setting appropriate criteria for object agnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 55–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 103.
Behrmann M, Geskin J:
Over time, the right results will emerge.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 102–11. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 104.
Susilo T:
The face specificity of lifelong prosopagnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2018; 35(1–2): 1–3. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 105.
Gray KLH, Biotti F, Cook R:
Evaluating object recognition ability in developmental prosopagnosia using the Cambridge Car Memory Test.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2019; 26: 1–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 106.
Barton JJ, Hanif H, Ashraf S:
Relating visual to verbal semantic knowledge: the evaluation of object recognition in prosopagnosia.
Brain.
2009; 132(Pt 12): 3456–66. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 107.
Barton JJS, Albonico A, Susilo T, et al.:
Object recognition in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2019; 1–31. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 108.
Behrmann M, Plaut DC:
Distributed circuits, not circumscribed centers, mediate visual recognition.
Trends Cogn Sci.
2013; 17(5): 210–9. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 109.
Dundas EM, Plaut DC, Behrmann M:
The joint development of hemispheric lateralization for words and faces.
J Exp Psychol Gen.
2013; 142(2): 348–58. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 110.
Dehaene S, Pegado F, Braga LW, et al.:
How learning to read changes the cortical networks for vision and language.
Science.
2010; 330(6009): 1359–64. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 111.
Plaut DC, Behrmann M:
Complementary neural representations for faces and words: a computational exploration.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2011; 28(3–4): 251–75. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 112.
Nestor A, Behrmann M, Plaut DC:
The neural basis of visual word form processing: a multivariate investigation.
Cereb Cortex.
2013; 23(7): 1673–84. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 113.
Behrmann M, Plaut DC:
Bilateral hemispheric processing of words and faces: evidence from word impairments in prosopagnosia and face impairments in pure alexia.
Cereb Cortex.
2014; 24(4): 1102–18. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 114.
Susilo T, Wright V, Tree JJ, et al.:
Acquired prosopagnosia without word recognition deficits.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2015; 32(6): 321–39. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 115.
Hills CS, Pancaroglu R, Duchaine B, et al.:
Word and text processing in acquired prosopagnosia.
Ann Neurol.
2015; 78(2): 258–71. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 116.
Rubino C, Corrow SL, Corrow JC, et al.:
Word and text processing in developmental prosopagnosia.
Cogn Neuropsychol.
2016; 33(5–6): 315–28. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 117.
Starrfelt R, Klargaard SK, Petersen A, et al.:
Reading in developmental prosopagnosia: Evidence for a dissociation between word and face recognition.
Neuropsychology.
2018; 32(2): 138–47. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 118.
Burns EJ, Bennetts RJ, Bate S, et al.:
Intact word processing in developmental prosopagnosia.
Sci Rep.
2017; 7(1): 1683. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 119.
Campbell R, Landis T, Regard M:
Face recognition and lipreading. A neurological dissociation.
Brain.
1986; 109(Pt 3): 509–21. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 120.
Rentschler I, Treutwein B, Landis T:
Dissociation of local and global processing in visual agnosia.
Vision Res.
1994; 34(7): 963–71. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 121.
Barton JJ, Sekunova A, Sheldon C, et al.:
Reading words, seeing style: the neuropsychology of word, font and handwriting perception.
Neuropsychologia.
2010; 48(13): 3868–77. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 122.
Robotham RJ, Starrfelt R:
Face and Word Recognition Can Be Selectively Affected by Brain Injury or Developmental Disorders.
Front Psychol.
2017; 8: 1547. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
| F1000 Recommendation
- 123.
Albonico A, Barton JJS:
Face perception in pure alexia: Complementary contributions of the left fusiform gyrus to facial identity and facial speech processing.
Cortex.
2017; 96: 59–72. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 124.
Campbell R, Garwood J, Franklin S, et al.:
Neuropsychological studies of auditory-visual fusion illusions. Four case studies and their implications.
Neuropsychologia.
1990; 28(8): 787–802. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 125.
Glowic C, Violon A:
[A case of regressive prosopagnosia (author's transl)].
Acta Neurol Belg.
1981; 81(2): 86–97. PubMed Abstract
- 126.
Hier DB, Mondlock J, Caplan LR:
Behavioral abnormalities after right hemisphere stroke.
Neurology.
1983; 33(3): 337–44. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 127.
Lang N, Baudewig J, Kallenberg K, et al.:
Transient prosopagnosia after ischemic stroke.
Neurology.
2006; 66(6): 916. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 128.
Haxby JV, Hoffman EA, Gobbini MI:
The distributed human neural system for face perception.
Trends Cogn Sci.
2000; 4(6): 223–33. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 129.
DeGutis JM, Chiu C, Grosso ME, et al.:
Face processing improvements in prosopagnosia: successes and failures over the last 50 years.
Front Hum Neurosci.
2014; 8: 561. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 130.
Bate S, Cook SJ, Duchaine B, et al.:
Intranasal inhalation of oxytocin improves face processing in developmental prosopagnosia.
Cortex.
2014; 50: 55–63. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 131.
Bate S, Bennetts RJ:
The rehabilitation of face recognition impairments: a critical review and future directions.
Front Hum Neurosci.
2014; 8: 491. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 132.
Davies-Thompson J, Fletcher K, Hills C, et al.:
Perceptual Learning of Faces: A Rehabilitative Study of Acquired Prosopagnosia.
J Cogn Neurosci.
2017; 29(3): 573–91. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 133.
Wilson BA:
Rehabilitation of memory. New York: Guilford Publications; 1987. Reference Source
- 134.
Polster MR, Rapcsak SZ:
Representations in learning new faces: evidence from prosopagnosia.
J Int Neuropsychol Soc.
1996; 2(3): 240–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 135.
Francis R, Riddoch MJ, Humphreys GW:
'Who's that girl?: ' Prosopagnosia, person-based semantic disorder, and the reacquisition of face identification ability.
Neuropsychol Rehabil.
2002; 12: 1–26. Publisher Full Text
- 136.
Powell J, Letson S, Davidoff J, et al.:
Enhancement of face recognition learning in patients with brain injury using three cognitive training procedures.
Neuropsychol Rehabil.
2008; 18(2): 182–203. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
- 137.
Mayer E, Rossion B, Godefroy O, et al.:
The Behavioral Cognitive Neurology of Stroke. Cambridge University Press Cambridge; 2007. Reference Source
- 138.
Beyn ES, Knyazeva GR:
The problem of prosopagnosia.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry.
1962; 25: 154–8. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
- 139.
DeGutis J, Cohan S, Nakayama K:
Holistic face training enhances face processing in developmental prosopagnosia.
Brain.
2014; 137(Pt 6): 1781–98. PubMed Abstract
| Publisher Full Text
| Free Full Text
Comments on this article Comments (0)