Use the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association 7th edition when citing sources for this class.
You can find copies at the Research Help Desk, or you can use the Excelsior OWL guide to APA style.
Individuals with developmental prosopagnosia (DP) all exhibit impairments in face memory, but the specificity of these face memory impairments is debated. One problem is that standard behavioural tasks are not able to provide independent measurement of face perception, face memory, and face matching (the decision process required to judge whether two instances of a face are of the same individual or different individuals). The present study utilised a new test of face matching, the Oxford Face Matching Test (OFMT), and a novel analysis strategy to derive these independent indices. Twenty-nine individuals with DP and the same number of matched neurotypical controls completed the OFMT, the Glasgow Face Matching Test, and the Cambridge Face Memory Test. Results revealed individuals with DP exhibit impairments in face perception, face memory and face matching. Collectively, these results suggest that face processing impairments in DP are more comprehensive than has previously been suggested.
Stantić, M., Pounder, Z., Bate, S., Susilo, T., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2022). Individuals with developmental prosopagnosia show independent impairments in face perception, face memory and face matching. Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 157, 266–273. https://doi-org.ezpro.cc.gettysburg.edu/10.1016/j.cortex.2022.09.012
Faces and voices are of high importance in interpersonal communication, and there are notable parallels between face and voice perception. However, these parallels do not sit entirely comfortably with the full range of available evidence. In this review, we evaluate parallels between the functional and neural organisation of face and voice perception, while locating these in the context of ways in which faces and voices also differ. We take the discussion to the next level by asking why these commonalities and differences exist. A novel synthesis is offered, grounded in the interaction between intrinsic characteristics of faces and voices and the demands of everyday life, showing how the pattern of findings reflects a system that can respond optimally to different everyday demands.
Young, A. W., Frühholz, S., & Schweinberger, S. R. (2020). Face and voice perception: Understanding commonalities and differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(5), 398–410. https://doi-org.ezpro.cc.gettysburg.edu/10.1016/j.tics.2020.02.001
Previous research has demonstrated several own-group biases (OGBs) in face recognition, but why they occur is unclear. Social–cognitive accounts suggest they stem from differential attention and facial processing, following the categorisation of a face as belonging to an 'in' or 'out' group. Three studies explored whether OGBs can be produced by mere categorisation at encoding and investigated the role of in-group membership saliency on face recognition. Participants saw 40 facial images fictionally grouped according to in-/out-group status. Studies 1 and 2 used university membership as the grouping variable and found no evidence of an OGB, and no relationship between OGB magnitude and salience of group membership. Study 3 used the same design as Study 2, but with a highly salient group characteristic: participants’ stance on the U.K. Referendum (i.e., whether they were 'Leave' or 'Remain' supporters). In this case, an asymmetrical OGB was found, with only Remain voters demonstrating an OGB. Furthermore, a relationship between OGB magnitude and attitude toward the Referendum result was found. Overall, our results suggest that social categorisation and membership saliency alone may not be enough to moderate in- and out-group face recognition. However, when sufficiently polarised groups are used as in-/out-group categories, OGBs may occur.
Harrison, V., Hole, G., & Habibi, R. (2020). Are you in or are you out? The importance of group saliency in own-group biases in face recognition. Perception, 49(6), 672–687. https://doi-org.ezpro.cc.gettysburg.edu/10.1177/0301006620918100
Describes the care of a 62-yr-old female patient with Cotard's syndrome with face processing deficits. The phenomenology of Cotard's syndrome may be an expression of underlying visual processing deficits which include abnormalities in face perception processing. Phenomenologic and neurobiologic characteristics of this case are similar to those found among delusional misidentification syndromes. This similarity suggests areas for further study that may lead to a better understanding of the relation of phenomenology to neurobiology in Cotard's syndrome.
Silva, J. A., & Leong, G. B. (1996). The relation of Cotard’s syndrome to delusional misidentification. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 33(3), 188–193.
Musselman Library subscribes to two specific databases that will be especially useful for this assignment.
PsycArticles is a relatively small database that searches fewer than 100 journals. The upside is that it almost exclusively contains journals published by the American Psychological Association (APA), so the articles you find should be the exact kind of research you need. When searching, remember to use limiters on the left side of your results screen to filter out sources you know you don't want:
The image on the right shows where to find the different limiters and how you can use them to perform more targeted advanced searches.
If PsycArticles doesn't have anything that really fits for you, feel free to experiment with some searches in PsycInfo. It searches 2,200+ journals, so you will end up with a lot more results compared to the same search in PsycArticles. The downside is that you might find interdisciplinary work that isn't, strictly speaking, from a psychology research journal. Double check with Professor Cain if you aren't sure about the articles you've located.
Fortunately, PsycInfo and PsycArticles use a very similar layout, so you'll be able to use the same limiting features when refining your searches.
As you read the abstract of an empirical article, take note of how well it adheres to the standardized structure of a paper presenting original research:
Reading the abstract is not a substitute for reading the entire paper—you will miss out on nuance, insight, and analysis if you just read a one-paragraph summary of a larger study.
Reading the abstract is an important part of evaluating sources and identifying which articles will be the best fit for your particular research topic, though. It can also help you read the full paper more strategically since you know beforehand what findings the article is building toward sharing with the reader.
