Selective attention to static and dynamic faces and facial cues

dc.contributor.authorStoesz, Brenda Marie
dc.contributor.examiningcommitteeMarotta, Jonathan (Psychology) Pearson, Pauline (Psychology) Hare, James (Biological Sciences) Lee, Kang (Applied Psychology and Human Development, OISE, University of Toronto)en_US
dc.contributor.supervisorJakobson, Lorna (Psychology)en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-09-08T19:43:40Z
dc.date.available2014-09-08T19:43:40Z
dc.date.issued2013en_US
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.degree.disciplinePsychologyen_US
dc.degree.levelDoctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.)en_US
dc.description.abstractMuch of what is known about how we process faces comes from research using static stimuli. Thus, the primary goal of the present series of studies was to compare the processing of more naturalistic, dynamic face stimuli to the processing of static face stimuli. A second goal of the present series of studies was to provide insight into the development of attentional mechanisms that underlie perception of faces. Results from the eye-tracking study (Chapter 2) indicated that viewers attended to faces more than to other parts of the static or dynamic social scenes. Importantly, motion cues were associated with a reduction in the number, but an increase in the average duration of fixations on faces. Children showed the largest effects related to the introduction of motion cues, suggesting that they find dynamic faces difficult to process. Then using selective attention tasks (Chapters 3-5), interactions between the processing of facial expression and identity while participants viewed static and dynamic faces were examined. When processing static faces, viewers experienced significant interference from task-irrelevant cues (expression or identity) while processing the relevant cues (identity or expression). Age-related differences in interference effects were not evident (Chapter 3); however, biological sex and perceptual biases did contribute to the levels of interference seen with static faces (Chapters 4-5). During dynamic trials, however, viewers (regardless of age, sex, or perceptual bias) experienced negligible interference from task-irrelevant facial cues. Taken together, these findings stress the importance of using dynamic displays when characterizing typical face processing mechanisms, using the same methods across development, and of considering individual differences when examining various face processing abilities.en_US
dc.description.noteOctober 2014en_US
dc.identifier.citationStoesz, B. M., & Jakobson, L. S. (2013). A sex difference in interference between identity and expression judgments with static but not dynamic faces. Journal of Vision, 13(5):26, 1–14, http://www.journalofvision.org/content/13/5/26, doi:10. 1167/13.5.26.en_US
dc.identifier.citationStoesz, B. M., & Jakobson, L. S. (2014). Developmental changes in attention to faces and bodies in static and dynamic scenes. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(193). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg. 2014.00193en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1993/23996
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherJournal of Visionen_US
dc.publisherFrontiers in Psychologyen_US
dc.rightsopen accessen_US
dc.subjecteye-trackingen_US
dc.subjectdevelopmenten_US
dc.subjectnonrigid motionen_US
dc.subjectsex differencesen_US
dc.subjectidentityen_US
dc.subjectexpressionen_US
dc.titleSelective attention to static and dynamic faces and facial cuesen_US
dc.typedoctoral thesisen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Stoesz_Brenda.pdf
Size:
1.95 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.25 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Description: