#faceperception — Public Fediverse posts

DATE: August 1, 2026 at 02:00PM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------

TITLE: Horror soundtracks can make friendly smiles feel eerie and threatening, study finds

URL: https://www.psypost.org/horror-soundtracks-can-make-friendly-smiles-feel-eerie-and-threatening-study-finds/

A new study published in the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology suggests that scary music can subtly alter how people interpret human facial expressions, making even smiling faces seem somewhat threatening. By measuring both subjective ratings and involuntary eye responses, scientists observed that ominous soundtracks biased participants toward perceiving greater danger in human faces. These findings demonstrate how background auditory cues might unconsciously shape everyday social evaluations and media interpretation.

Human interaction relies heavily on reading facial expressions to evaluate whether someone poses a threat or offers safety. Background sounds often establish an emotional context that influences how subsequent information is processed, a phenomenon known as affective priming. When an initial stimulus carries a strong emotional tone, it tends to frame how a person interprets visual cues that follow shortly after.

Horror film soundtracks are constructed to evoke anxiety through rapid volume changes, jarring pitches, and acoustic patterns that mimic human cries. These fear-inducing sounds tend to trigger subcortical brain regions that monitor the environment for danger. The authors conducted this research to explore whether auditory fear cues alter subjective perceptions of social threat, and whether these changes are accompanied by physiological markers of arousal.

Shumetha Sidhu, a lecturer in psychology and director of postgraduate research studies at the University of Reading Malaysia, explained what led her team to pursue this topic. “It has always been fascinating to me how preconceived notions or other cognitive factors can influence perception, and this study came about because my students were interested in emotional face perception research too,” Sidhu told PsyPost. “A bit of literature reviewing showed this was an underexplored area, and we decided to run with it using the angle of threat perception as it seems highly relevant to a lot of people.”

To test this possibility, the researchers recruited 45 university students in Malaysia, aged 18 to 25, with an average age of approximately 21 years. The participant group was predominantly female, including 42 females and three males, with a multiethnic background comprising Chinese, Malay, Indian, and other ethnicities. Participants sat 60 centimeters away from an eye-tracking screen while wearing over-ear headphones fixed at a set volume.

The study used a within-subjects experimental design, meaning every participant experienced all combinations of sounds and facial expressions. The researchers controlled for environmental influences by maintaining constant overhead lighting and using a fixed monitor display. In each trial, participants listened to a 15-second audio clip followed immediately by a photograph of a face displayed for one second.

The auditory clips featured either a fear-inducing track from the film *Insidious* or neutral white noise as a control baseline. The visual stimuli consisted of 90 photographs depicting young adult Chinese models showing angry, neutral, or happy expressions. Participants completed 90 randomized trials in total, split across three separate testing blocks to minimize fatigue.

After viewing each face, participants rated how threatening the image appeared on a continuous scale from 0, indicating not at all threatening, to 100, indicating extremely threatening. To hide the true intent of the experiment, participants also rated how exciting and relaxing the faces appeared. Physiological response was measured using pupillometry, a technique that tracks changes in pupil diameter to index autonomic nervous system activity and heightened attention.

For the threat rating analysis, data from three participants were excluded as statistical outliers, leaving a sample of 42 individuals. Exposure to scary music led to a notable overall shift in perceived threat across all facial expressions. The average threat rating across all face types rose from 18.90 points out of 100 during white noise to 41.65 points during scary music, representing an absolute increase of 22.75 points and more than doubling the baseline score.

Angry faces received the highest threat scores in both conditions, moving from 34.92 points under white noise to 52.93 points under scary music. Neutral faces saw an increase from a baseline of 14.18 points with white noise up to 39.62 points with scary music. Happy faces, which averaged a low threat rating of 7.58 points following white noise, rose to 32.41 points when paired with scary music.

The reaction to smiling faces proved particularly unexpected for the research team. “We didn’t expect that fear-inducing music would increase threat perception towards happy faces!” Sidhu noted.

During the neutral white noise condition, a distinct hierarchy emerged where angry faces were judged as most threatening, followed by neutral faces, and finally happy faces. When scary music was played, angry faces remained the highest in threat, but the difference between neutral faces and happy faces was no longer statistically significant. This outcome suggests that fear-inducing audio may blur the boundary between emotionally neutral signals and friendly expressions.

Pupillometry data were analyzed for all 45 participants, as no outliers were present in the eye-tracking measurements. The main difference in average pupil diameter between the scary music condition (2.94 millimeters) and the white noise condition (2.93 millimeters) was not statistically significant. This indicates that scary music did not produce a widespread, uniform enlargement of pupil size across all facial expressions.

The scientists observed a specific interaction between music type and facial expression regarding pupil size. When participants viewed neutral faces after listening to scary music, their average pupil diameter expanded to 2.94 millimeters compared to 2.91 millimeters after white noise. In contrast, pupil size changes for angry faces (2.95 millimeters under both sounds) and happy faces (2.93 millimeters with white noise versus 2.92 millimeters with scary music) were not statistically significant across sound conditions.

Regarding the broader message of these outcomes, Sidhu emphasized how external environments shape social processing. The primary takeaway, she explained, is “that fear-inducing music can influence perception of not just negative and neutral emotions, but also positive ones (happy faces). It highlights the importance of contextual cues when processing information so as not to be easily biased.”

The findings do not suggest that scary music induces full-blown panic or causes people to view ordinary faces as severe physical threats. The threat ratings for smiling faces paired with scary music averaged approximately 32 on a 100-point scale, indicating mild unease or ambiguity rather than extreme terror. The auditory priming effect appears to introduce a subtle interpretive bias rather than a total distortion of reality.

The authors also pointed out that readers should consider the specific demographics of the study when evaluating the results. “We have a predominantly female sample, so I will not overly generalize these findings,” Sidhu stated. “Likewise, we used a South East Asian sample, so no guarantee that it generalizes to other demographics.”

Moving forward, the research team aims to explore why positive expressions become eerie under scary audio conditions. “The unexpected finding we had was that people perceived happy faces as more threatening when exposed to the fear-inducing music,” Sidhu said. “One interpretation for this could be that a smile coupled with that type of soundtrack was conveying sinister intent. We plan on investigating this a bit further down the line.”

Future work could also examine whether music-induced changes in facial threat perception spill over into real-world choices and social behaviors. Scientists could explore this question by pairing different musical backgrounds with faces during economic trust games to observe whether ominous sounds alter financial decisions or social cooperation.

The study, “The Sound of Fear: How Horror Soundtracks Shape Threat Perception of Emotional Faces,” was authored by Li Fun Lua, Xuan Nee Kong, Jasmine K. W. Lee, and Shumetha Kaur Sidhu.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/horror-soundtracks-can-make-friendly-smiles-feel-eerie-and-threatening-study-finds/

-------------------------------------------------

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

-------------------------------------------------

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #HorrorSoundtracks #ThreatPerception #AffectivePriming #Pupillometry #EmotionalFaces #FearMusic #FacePerception #PsychologyStudy #AuditoryCues #SocialCognition

DATE: August 1, 2026 at 02:00PM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------

TITLE: Horror soundtracks can make friendly smiles feel eerie and threatening, study finds

URL: https://www.psypost.org/horror-soundtracks-can-make-friendly-smiles-feel-eerie-and-threatening-study-finds/

A new study published in the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology suggests that scary music can subtly alter how people interpret human facial expressions, making even smiling faces seem somewhat threatening. By measuring both subjective ratings and involuntary eye responses, scientists observed that ominous soundtracks biased participants toward perceiving greater danger in human faces. These findings demonstrate how background auditory cues might unconsciously shape everyday social evaluations and media interpretation.

Human interaction relies heavily on reading facial expressions to evaluate whether someone poses a threat or offers safety. Background sounds often establish an emotional context that influences how subsequent information is processed, a phenomenon known as affective priming. When an initial stimulus carries a strong emotional tone, it tends to frame how a person interprets visual cues that follow shortly after.

Horror film soundtracks are constructed to evoke anxiety through rapid volume changes, jarring pitches, and acoustic patterns that mimic human cries. These fear-inducing sounds tend to trigger subcortical brain regions that monitor the environment for danger. The authors conducted this research to explore whether auditory fear cues alter subjective perceptions of social threat, and whether these changes are accompanied by physiological markers of arousal.

Shumetha Sidhu, a lecturer in psychology and director of postgraduate research studies at the University of Reading Malaysia, explained what led her team to pursue this topic. “It has always been fascinating to me how preconceived notions or other cognitive factors can influence perception, and this study came about because my students were interested in emotional face perception research too,” Sidhu told PsyPost. “A bit of literature reviewing showed this was an underexplored area, and we decided to run with it using the angle of threat perception as it seems highly relevant to a lot of people.”

To test this possibility, the researchers recruited 45 university students in Malaysia, aged 18 to 25, with an average age of approximately 21 years. The participant group was predominantly female, including 42 females and three males, with a multiethnic background comprising Chinese, Malay, Indian, and other ethnicities. Participants sat 60 centimeters away from an eye-tracking screen while wearing over-ear headphones fixed at a set volume.

The study used a within-subjects experimental design, meaning every participant experienced all combinations of sounds and facial expressions. The researchers controlled for environmental influences by maintaining constant overhead lighting and using a fixed monitor display. In each trial, participants listened to a 15-second audio clip followed immediately by a photograph of a face displayed for one second.

The auditory clips featured either a fear-inducing track from the film *Insidious* or neutral white noise as a control baseline. The visual stimuli consisted of 90 photographs depicting young adult Chinese models showing angry, neutral, or happy expressions. Participants completed 90 randomized trials in total, split across three separate testing blocks to minimize fatigue.

After viewing each face, participants rated how threatening the image appeared on a continuous scale from 0, indicating not at all threatening, to 100, indicating extremely threatening. To hide the true intent of the experiment, participants also rated how exciting and relaxing the faces appeared. Physiological response was measured using pupillometry, a technique that tracks changes in pupil diameter to index autonomic nervous system activity and heightened attention.

For the threat rating analysis, data from three participants were excluded as statistical outliers, leaving a sample of 42 individuals. Exposure to scary music led to a notable overall shift in perceived threat across all facial expressions. The average threat rating across all face types rose from 18.90 points out of 100 during white noise to 41.65 points during scary music, representing an absolute increase of 22.75 points and more than doubling the baseline score.

Angry faces received the highest threat scores in both conditions, moving from 34.92 points under white noise to 52.93 points under scary music. Neutral faces saw an increase from a baseline of 14.18 points with white noise up to 39.62 points with scary music. Happy faces, which averaged a low threat rating of 7.58 points following white noise, rose to 32.41 points when paired with scary music.

The reaction to smiling faces proved particularly unexpected for the research team. “We didn’t expect that fear-inducing music would increase threat perception towards happy faces!” Sidhu noted.

During the neutral white noise condition, a distinct hierarchy emerged where angry faces were judged as most threatening, followed by neutral faces, and finally happy faces. When scary music was played, angry faces remained the highest in threat, but the difference between neutral faces and happy faces was no longer statistically significant. This outcome suggests that fear-inducing audio may blur the boundary between emotionally neutral signals and friendly expressions.

Pupillometry data were analyzed for all 45 participants, as no outliers were present in the eye-tracking measurements. The main difference in average pupil diameter between the scary music condition (2.94 millimeters) and the white noise condition (2.93 millimeters) was not statistically significant. This indicates that scary music did not produce a widespread, uniform enlargement of pupil size across all facial expressions.

The scientists observed a specific interaction between music type and facial expression regarding pupil size. When participants viewed neutral faces after listening to scary music, their average pupil diameter expanded to 2.94 millimeters compared to 2.91 millimeters after white noise. In contrast, pupil size changes for angry faces (2.95 millimeters under both sounds) and happy faces (2.93 millimeters with white noise versus 2.92 millimeters with scary music) were not statistically significant across sound conditions.

Regarding the broader message of these outcomes, Sidhu emphasized how external environments shape social processing. The primary takeaway, she explained, is “that fear-inducing music can influence perception of not just negative and neutral emotions, but also positive ones (happy faces). It highlights the importance of contextual cues when processing information so as not to be easily biased.”

The findings do not suggest that scary music induces full-blown panic or causes people to view ordinary faces as severe physical threats. The threat ratings for smiling faces paired with scary music averaged approximately 32 on a 100-point scale, indicating mild unease or ambiguity rather than extreme terror. The auditory priming effect appears to introduce a subtle interpretive bias rather than a total distortion of reality.

The authors also pointed out that readers should consider the specific demographics of the study when evaluating the results. “We have a predominantly female sample, so I will not overly generalize these findings,” Sidhu stated. “Likewise, we used a South East Asian sample, so no guarantee that it generalizes to other demographics.”

Moving forward, the research team aims to explore why positive expressions become eerie under scary audio conditions. “The unexpected finding we had was that people perceived happy faces as more threatening when exposed to the fear-inducing music,” Sidhu said. “One interpretation for this could be that a smile coupled with that type of soundtrack was conveying sinister intent. We plan on investigating this a bit further down the line.”

Future work could also examine whether music-induced changes in facial threat perception spill over into real-world choices and social behaviors. Scientists could explore this question by pairing different musical backgrounds with faces during economic trust games to observe whether ominous sounds alter financial decisions or social cooperation.

The study, “The Sound of Fear: How Horror Soundtracks Shape Threat Perception of Emotional Faces,” was authored by Li Fun Lua, Xuan Nee Kong, Jasmine K. W. Lee, and Shumetha Kaur Sidhu.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/horror-soundtracks-can-make-friendly-smiles-feel-eerie-and-threatening-study-finds/

-------------------------------------------------

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

-------------------------------------------------

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #HorrorSoundtracks #ThreatPerception #AffectivePriming #Pupillometry #EmotionalFaces #FearMusic #FacePerception #PsychologyStudy #AuditoryCues #SocialCognition

DATE: August 1, 2026 at 02:00PM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------

TITLE: Horror soundtracks can make friendly smiles feel eerie and threatening, study finds

URL: https://www.psypost.org/horror-soundtracks-can-make-friendly-smiles-feel-eerie-and-threatening-study-finds/

A new study published in the Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology suggests that scary music can subtly alter how people interpret human facial expressions, making even smiling faces seem somewhat threatening. By measuring both subjective ratings and involuntary eye responses, scientists observed that ominous soundtracks biased participants toward perceiving greater danger in human faces. These findings demonstrate how background auditory cues might unconsciously shape everyday social evaluations and media interpretation.

Human interaction relies heavily on reading facial expressions to evaluate whether someone poses a threat or offers safety. Background sounds often establish an emotional context that influences how subsequent information is processed, a phenomenon known as affective priming. When an initial stimulus carries a strong emotional tone, it tends to frame how a person interprets visual cues that follow shortly after.

Horror film soundtracks are constructed to evoke anxiety through rapid volume changes, jarring pitches, and acoustic patterns that mimic human cries. These fear-inducing sounds tend to trigger subcortical brain regions that monitor the environment for danger. The authors conducted this research to explore whether auditory fear cues alter subjective perceptions of social threat, and whether these changes are accompanied by physiological markers of arousal.

Shumetha Sidhu, a lecturer in psychology and director of postgraduate research studies at the University of Reading Malaysia, explained what led her team to pursue this topic. “It has always been fascinating to me how preconceived notions or other cognitive factors can influence perception, and this study came about because my students were interested in emotional face perception research too,” Sidhu told PsyPost. “A bit of literature reviewing showed this was an underexplored area, and we decided to run with it using the angle of threat perception as it seems highly relevant to a lot of people.”

To test this possibility, the researchers recruited 45 university students in Malaysia, aged 18 to 25, with an average age of approximately 21 years. The participant group was predominantly female, including 42 females and three males, with a multiethnic background comprising Chinese, Malay, Indian, and other ethnicities. Participants sat 60 centimeters away from an eye-tracking screen while wearing over-ear headphones fixed at a set volume.

The study used a within-subjects experimental design, meaning every participant experienced all combinations of sounds and facial expressions. The researchers controlled for environmental influences by maintaining constant overhead lighting and using a fixed monitor display. In each trial, participants listened to a 15-second audio clip followed immediately by a photograph of a face displayed for one second.

The auditory clips featured either a fear-inducing track from the film *Insidious* or neutral white noise as a control baseline. The visual stimuli consisted of 90 photographs depicting young adult Chinese models showing angry, neutral, or happy expressions. Participants completed 90 randomized trials in total, split across three separate testing blocks to minimize fatigue.

After viewing each face, participants rated how threatening the image appeared on a continuous scale from 0, indicating not at all threatening, to 100, indicating extremely threatening. To hide the true intent of the experiment, participants also rated how exciting and relaxing the faces appeared. Physiological response was measured using pupillometry, a technique that tracks changes in pupil diameter to index autonomic nervous system activity and heightened attention.

For the threat rating analysis, data from three participants were excluded as statistical outliers, leaving a sample of 42 individuals. Exposure to scary music led to a notable overall shift in perceived threat across all facial expressions. The average threat rating across all face types rose from 18.90 points out of 100 during white noise to 41.65 points during scary music, representing an absolute increase of 22.75 points and more than doubling the baseline score.

Angry faces received the highest threat scores in both conditions, moving from 34.92 points under white noise to 52.93 points under scary music. Neutral faces saw an increase from a baseline of 14.18 points with white noise up to 39.62 points with scary music. Happy faces, which averaged a low threat rating of 7.58 points following white noise, rose to 32.41 points when paired with scary music.

The reaction to smiling faces proved particularly unexpected for the research team. “We didn’t expect that fear-inducing music would increase threat perception towards happy faces!” Sidhu noted.

During the neutral white noise condition, a distinct hierarchy emerged where angry faces were judged as most threatening, followed by neutral faces, and finally happy faces. When scary music was played, angry faces remained the highest in threat, but the difference between neutral faces and happy faces was no longer statistically significant. This outcome suggests that fear-inducing audio may blur the boundary between emotionally neutral signals and friendly expressions.

Pupillometry data were analyzed for all 45 participants, as no outliers were present in the eye-tracking measurements. The main difference in average pupil diameter between the scary music condition (2.94 millimeters) and the white noise condition (2.93 millimeters) was not statistically significant. This indicates that scary music did not produce a widespread, uniform enlargement of pupil size across all facial expressions.

The scientists observed a specific interaction between music type and facial expression regarding pupil size. When participants viewed neutral faces after listening to scary music, their average pupil diameter expanded to 2.94 millimeters compared to 2.91 millimeters after white noise. In contrast, pupil size changes for angry faces (2.95 millimeters under both sounds) and happy faces (2.93 millimeters with white noise versus 2.92 millimeters with scary music) were not statistically significant across sound conditions.

Regarding the broader message of these outcomes, Sidhu emphasized how external environments shape social processing. The primary takeaway, she explained, is “that fear-inducing music can influence perception of not just negative and neutral emotions, but also positive ones (happy faces). It highlights the importance of contextual cues when processing information so as not to be easily biased.”

The findings do not suggest that scary music induces full-blown panic or causes people to view ordinary faces as severe physical threats. The threat ratings for smiling faces paired with scary music averaged approximately 32 on a 100-point scale, indicating mild unease or ambiguity rather than extreme terror. The auditory priming effect appears to introduce a subtle interpretive bias rather than a total distortion of reality.

The authors also pointed out that readers should consider the specific demographics of the study when evaluating the results. “We have a predominantly female sample, so I will not overly generalize these findings,” Sidhu stated. “Likewise, we used a South East Asian sample, so no guarantee that it generalizes to other demographics.”

Moving forward, the research team aims to explore why positive expressions become eerie under scary audio conditions. “The unexpected finding we had was that people perceived happy faces as more threatening when exposed to the fear-inducing music,” Sidhu said. “One interpretation for this could be that a smile coupled with that type of soundtrack was conveying sinister intent. We plan on investigating this a bit further down the line.”

Future work could also examine whether music-induced changes in facial threat perception spill over into real-world choices and social behaviors. Scientists could explore this question by pairing different musical backgrounds with faces during economic trust games to observe whether ominous sounds alter financial decisions or social cooperation.

The study, “The Sound of Fear: How Horror Soundtracks Shape Threat Perception of Emotional Faces,” was authored by Li Fun Lua, Xuan Nee Kong, Jasmine K. W. Lee, and Shumetha Kaur Sidhu.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/horror-soundtracks-can-make-friendly-smiles-feel-eerie-and-threatening-study-finds/

-------------------------------------------------

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

-------------------------------------------------

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #HorrorSoundtracks #ThreatPerception #AffectivePriming #Pupillometry #EmotionalFaces #FearMusic #FacePerception #PsychologyStudy #AuditoryCues #SocialCognition

DATE: July 25, 2026 at 08:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------

TITLE: Aphantasia is linked to specific face recognition deficits, but matching skills remain intact

URL: https://www.psypost.org/aphantasia-is-linked-to-specific-face-recognition-deficits-but-matching-skills-remain-intact/

People who lack a mind’s eye, a condition known as aphantasia, tend to struggle with recognizing faces. A recent study published in the journal Cortex provides evidence that these individuals have specific difficulties with perceiving and remembering faces, but not with visually matching them. The findings help explain the underlying mechanics of face blindness that many people with aphantasia experience.

Aphantasia is a psychological condition where a person has an absent or severely reduced ability to form visual images in their mind. When someone with typical visual imagery thinks of an apple, they can picture its shape and color. A person with aphantasia cannot produce this mental picture.

This lack of visual imagery suggests possible effects on other cognitive functions. Past research indicates that many people with aphantasia self-report difficulties with facial recognition. Some even meet the criteria for prosopagnosia, which is a neurological condition commonly known as face blindness.

Recognizing a face is not a single, simple action. It relies on a combination of different cognitive processes working together. Breaking down these individual steps helps scientists understand where cognitive deficits originate.

Mirta Stantić, a lecturer at Royal Holloway, University of London, and co-author of the study, explained the motivation behind the research. “We’ve been investigating profiles of face recognition abilities in different populations for years, and have already looked at populations of people who have face blindness, autism, or who are exceptionally good at remembering faces,” Stantić said. “Here, we were interested in figuring out how aphantasia, inability to form mental imagery, influences various phases of face recognition.”

The authors wanted to isolate specific sub-processes. “We wanted to understand whether some steps in this complex mental process are more affected than others, and whether this differs across individuals,” Stantić noted.

The researchers recruited 34 adults with congenital aphantasia, meaning they were born with the condition. They also recruited a control group of 41 adults with typical visual imagery abilities. The participants were roughly matched in age, with an average age of about 40 to 42 years old.

To confirm their group placements, participants completed the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire. This assessment asks people to rate the vividness of the mental images they can produce. People scoring very low were placed in the aphantasia group, and those scoring high were placed in the typical imagery group.

To test face matching and face perception, the participants completed the Oxford Face Matching Test. During this task, individuals saw 200 pairs of faces shown on a computer screen for just over one and a half seconds each. Half of the pairs showed two different photos of the same person, and half showed photos of two different people.

Participants first had to decide if the two faces belonged to the same person or different people. Then, they rated how perceptually similar the two faces looked on a scale from zero to one hundred. These ratings helped separate their basic decision-making from their visual perception.

To get a pure measurement of face perception, the scientists used a novel analytical strategy. They compared the human participants’ similarity ratings to similarity scores generated by three highly advanced facial recognition computer algorithms. If a participant’s rating deviated heavily from the computer algorithm’s objective rating, it indicated lower face perception abilities.

Next, the scientists tested face memory using the Cambridge Face Memory Test. In this assessment, participants learned to recognize six novel faces. They then had to identify these target faces among distractors across 72 trials, with the test growing progressively harder as the imagery changed.

The memory test is divided into three stages. The first stage presents faces with identical lighting and viewpoints. The later stages introduce drastic changes in how the faces are illuminated and oriented, forcing the brain to rely on a deep memory of the facial structure rather than a simple snapshot.

The researchers also asked participants to complete self-report surveys about their face recognition abilities in daily life. This included a twenty-item survey that asked them to rate statements about struggling to recognize classmates or friends. Finally, they conducted a visual acuity task where participants read shrinking rows of letters to ensure basic eyesight differences did not affect the outcomes.

The data showed that individuals with aphantasia reported much higher levels of face recognition difficulty in their everyday lives. About 26 percent of the aphantasia group scored above the strict threshold for face blindness on their self-report surveys. None of the typical imagers met this threshold.

Basic eyesight did not differ between the two groups on the visual acuity task. In addition, the participants completed a survey designed to measure autistic traits in adults. The researchers did not find a statistically significant difference in autistic traits between the aphantasia group and the control group, though the aphantasia group trended slightly higher.

The aphantasia group showed a noticeable impairment in face perception. Their similarity ratings on the paired face task deviated significantly more from the objective computer algorithm scores. This suggests that their basic perceptual processing of complex facial features is less precise.

This finding was somewhat unexpected based on past literature. “Some earlier research has suggested that visual perception is largely intact in aphantasia, but we found that participants with it were less accurate at perceptual face tasks,” Stantić told PsyPost. She suggested this might be because faces are highly complex visual stimuli.

“Additionally, this task required participants to make a judgment in a relatively short period of time and was designed to be challenging,” she added.

When it came to basic face matching, the aphantasia group performed just as well as the typical imagers. Both groups were equally accurate at deciding if two side-by-side photos showed the same person.

“Perhaps you would expect that, given difficulties in face perception and face memory, people with aphantasia would also struggle to accurately do face matching tasks,” Stantić said. “However, our results suggest that’s not the case.”

“Interestingly, their ability to disambiguate between two photographs (whether they show the same person or different people) is intact once we take into account their perceptual difficulties,” she noted.

To separate these intertwined skills, the researchers used statistical regression models. They were able to isolate memory performance by mathematically removing the influence of a person’s matching and perception scores. This allowed them to see the true, independent contribution of face memory.

The aphantasia group scored significantly lower on the memory test. Even after factoring out perception and matching abilities, the individuals with aphantasia still exhibited worse face memory than the control group.

“Aphantasia does not appear to cause a general inability to process faces, but people with aphantasia do have more difficulties with faces, as you would expect,” Stantić said.

“More broadly, this underscores the importance of understanding that face recognition is not a singular skill,” she added. “People can struggle with (or excel at) different aspects of this ability.”

One potential misinterpretation of this study is the assumption that all people with aphantasia have severe, clinical face blindness. The data shows that the majority of participants with aphantasia did not score low enough on the objective memory tests to be formally classified as having prosopagnosia. Their performance was simply weaker on average compared to typical imagers.

“Sometimes people think that folks with aphantasia have the same difficulties as people with prosopagnosia (who are often referred to as “face blind”) but this is not the case,” Stantić said. “There are distinct differences between the two populations and they face unique challenges.”

“Our data confirm this, as only about 10 percent of this sample with aphantasia scored clinically low on standard tests for prosopagnosia, clearly separating these samples,” Stantić explained. “The important thing to remember, therefore, is that there are subtle but crucial differences in experiences of people with aphantasia and prosopagnosia.”

The study also raises questions about exactly how visual imagery relates to perception. The authors note that mentally building a three-dimensional representation of a face from a two-dimensional photograph might require some level of mental imagery. It remains unknown if visual imagery is strictly necessary for face memory, or if the two functions merely rely on shared brain networks.

Future research could explore whether different subtypes of aphantasia exist. The researchers also hope to expand this work to other age groups. “In the future, we want to use this knowledge to understand how these abilities develop, or fail to develop, particularly in children of typical and atypical development,” Stantić said.

By using the new computer algorithm approach, the scientists can measure facial processing skills with greater precision. “This allows us to get a lot more targeted and precise with attempts to help those who have a hard time remembering faces,” she added. “We are hoping, in the long run, to develop programs that could help train people with difficulties.”

Gathering personal stories is a big part of that next step. “We are incredibly keen to hear from people with difficulties recognizing or remembering faces in everyday life or parents who think their children might be having a hard time with this,” Stantić said.

“First-hand accounts help us understand the range of experiences that may be missed by standard laboratory tests,” she explained. “These stories can directly inform the questions we investigate, as well as allow us to deliver targeted interventions.”

“If you want to be kept in touch with our research or potentially take part (we can come to you or often test remotely!), please contact us: mirtastantic.com.”

The study, “Individuals with aphantasia show independent impairments in face perception and face memory, but not face matching,” was authored by Zoë Pounder, Mirta Stantić, Reshanne Reeder, Caroline Catmur, and Geoffrey Bird.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/aphantasia-is-linked-to-specific-face-recognition-deficits-but-matching-skills-remain-intact/

-------------------------------------------------

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

-------------------------------------------------

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Aphantasia #FaceRecognition #Prosopagnosia #FacePerception #FaceMemory #VisualImagery #CortexStudy #CambridgeFaceMemoryTest #OxfordFaceMatchingTest #NeuroscienceResearch

DATE: July 25, 2026 at 08:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------

TITLE: Aphantasia is linked to specific face recognition deficits, but matching skills remain intact

URL: https://www.psypost.org/aphantasia-is-linked-to-specific-face-recognition-deficits-but-matching-skills-remain-intact/

People who lack a mind’s eye, a condition known as aphantasia, tend to struggle with recognizing faces. A recent study published in the journal Cortex provides evidence that these individuals have specific difficulties with perceiving and remembering faces, but not with visually matching them. The findings help explain the underlying mechanics of face blindness that many people with aphantasia experience.

Aphantasia is a psychological condition where a person has an absent or severely reduced ability to form visual images in their mind. When someone with typical visual imagery thinks of an apple, they can picture its shape and color. A person with aphantasia cannot produce this mental picture.

This lack of visual imagery suggests possible effects on other cognitive functions. Past research indicates that many people with aphantasia self-report difficulties with facial recognition. Some even meet the criteria for prosopagnosia, which is a neurological condition commonly known as face blindness.

Recognizing a face is not a single, simple action. It relies on a combination of different cognitive processes working together. Breaking down these individual steps helps scientists understand where cognitive deficits originate.

Mirta Stantić, a lecturer at Royal Holloway, University of London, and co-author of the study, explained the motivation behind the research. “We’ve been investigating profiles of face recognition abilities in different populations for years, and have already looked at populations of people who have face blindness, autism, or who are exceptionally good at remembering faces,” Stantić said. “Here, we were interested in figuring out how aphantasia, inability to form mental imagery, influences various phases of face recognition.”

The authors wanted to isolate specific sub-processes. “We wanted to understand whether some steps in this complex mental process are more affected than others, and whether this differs across individuals,” Stantić noted.

The researchers recruited 34 adults with congenital aphantasia, meaning they were born with the condition. They also recruited a control group of 41 adults with typical visual imagery abilities. The participants were roughly matched in age, with an average age of about 40 to 42 years old.

To confirm their group placements, participants completed the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire. This assessment asks people to rate the vividness of the mental images they can produce. People scoring very low were placed in the aphantasia group, and those scoring high were placed in the typical imagery group.

To test face matching and face perception, the participants completed the Oxford Face Matching Test. During this task, individuals saw 200 pairs of faces shown on a computer screen for just over one and a half seconds each. Half of the pairs showed two different photos of the same person, and half showed photos of two different people.

Participants first had to decide if the two faces belonged to the same person or different people. Then, they rated how perceptually similar the two faces looked on a scale from zero to one hundred. These ratings helped separate their basic decision-making from their visual perception.

To get a pure measurement of face perception, the scientists used a novel analytical strategy. They compared the human participants’ similarity ratings to similarity scores generated by three highly advanced facial recognition computer algorithms. If a participant’s rating deviated heavily from the computer algorithm’s objective rating, it indicated lower face perception abilities.

Next, the scientists tested face memory using the Cambridge Face Memory Test. In this assessment, participants learned to recognize six novel faces. They then had to identify these target faces among distractors across 72 trials, with the test growing progressively harder as the imagery changed.

The memory test is divided into three stages. The first stage presents faces with identical lighting and viewpoints. The later stages introduce drastic changes in how the faces are illuminated and oriented, forcing the brain to rely on a deep memory of the facial structure rather than a simple snapshot.

The researchers also asked participants to complete self-report surveys about their face recognition abilities in daily life. This included a twenty-item survey that asked them to rate statements about struggling to recognize classmates or friends. Finally, they conducted a visual acuity task where participants read shrinking rows of letters to ensure basic eyesight differences did not affect the outcomes.

The data showed that individuals with aphantasia reported much higher levels of face recognition difficulty in their everyday lives. About 26 percent of the aphantasia group scored above the strict threshold for face blindness on their self-report surveys. None of the typical imagers met this threshold.

Basic eyesight did not differ between the two groups on the visual acuity task. In addition, the participants completed a survey designed to measure autistic traits in adults. The researchers did not find a statistically significant difference in autistic traits between the aphantasia group and the control group, though the aphantasia group trended slightly higher.

The aphantasia group showed a noticeable impairment in face perception. Their similarity ratings on the paired face task deviated significantly more from the objective computer algorithm scores. This suggests that their basic perceptual processing of complex facial features is less precise.

This finding was somewhat unexpected based on past literature. “Some earlier research has suggested that visual perception is largely intact in aphantasia, but we found that participants with it were less accurate at perceptual face tasks,” Stantić told PsyPost. She suggested this might be because faces are highly complex visual stimuli.

“Additionally, this task required participants to make a judgment in a relatively short period of time and was designed to be challenging,” she added.

When it came to basic face matching, the aphantasia group performed just as well as the typical imagers. Both groups were equally accurate at deciding if two side-by-side photos showed the same person.

“Perhaps you would expect that, given difficulties in face perception and face memory, people with aphantasia would also struggle to accurately do face matching tasks,” Stantić said. “However, our results suggest that’s not the case.”

“Interestingly, their ability to disambiguate between two photographs (whether they show the same person or different people) is intact once we take into account their perceptual difficulties,” she noted.

To separate these intertwined skills, the researchers used statistical regression models. They were able to isolate memory performance by mathematically removing the influence of a person’s matching and perception scores. This allowed them to see the true, independent contribution of face memory.

The aphantasia group scored significantly lower on the memory test. Even after factoring out perception and matching abilities, the individuals with aphantasia still exhibited worse face memory than the control group.

“Aphantasia does not appear to cause a general inability to process faces, but people with aphantasia do have more difficulties with faces, as you would expect,” Stantić said.

“More broadly, this underscores the importance of understanding that face recognition is not a singular skill,” she added. “People can struggle with (or excel at) different aspects of this ability.”

One potential misinterpretation of this study is the assumption that all people with aphantasia have severe, clinical face blindness. The data shows that the majority of participants with aphantasia did not score low enough on the objective memory tests to be formally classified as having prosopagnosia. Their performance was simply weaker on average compared to typical imagers.

“Sometimes people think that folks with aphantasia have the same difficulties as people with prosopagnosia (who are often referred to as “face blind”) but this is not the case,” Stantić said. “There are distinct differences between the two populations and they face unique challenges.”

“Our data confirm this, as only about 10 percent of this sample with aphantasia scored clinically low on standard tests for prosopagnosia, clearly separating these samples,” Stantić explained. “The important thing to remember, therefore, is that there are subtle but crucial differences in experiences of people with aphantasia and prosopagnosia.”

The study also raises questions about exactly how visual imagery relates to perception. The authors note that mentally building a three-dimensional representation of a face from a two-dimensional photograph might require some level of mental imagery. It remains unknown if visual imagery is strictly necessary for face memory, or if the two functions merely rely on shared brain networks.

Future research could explore whether different subtypes of aphantasia exist. The researchers also hope to expand this work to other age groups. “In the future, we want to use this knowledge to understand how these abilities develop, or fail to develop, particularly in children of typical and atypical development,” Stantić said.

By using the new computer algorithm approach, the scientists can measure facial processing skills with greater precision. “This allows us to get a lot more targeted and precise with attempts to help those who have a hard time remembering faces,” she added. “We are hoping, in the long run, to develop programs that could help train people with difficulties.”

Gathering personal stories is a big part of that next step. “We are incredibly keen to hear from people with difficulties recognizing or remembering faces in everyday life or parents who think their children might be having a hard time with this,” Stantić said.

“First-hand accounts help us understand the range of experiences that may be missed by standard laboratory tests,” she explained. “These stories can directly inform the questions we investigate, as well as allow us to deliver targeted interventions.”

“If you want to be kept in touch with our research or potentially take part (we can come to you or often test remotely!), please contact us: mirtastantic.com.”

The study, “Individuals with aphantasia show independent impairments in face perception and face memory, but not face matching,” was authored by Zoë Pounder, Mirta Stantić, Reshanne Reeder, Caroline Catmur, and Geoffrey Bird.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/aphantasia-is-linked-to-specific-face-recognition-deficits-but-matching-skills-remain-intact/

-------------------------------------------------

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

-------------------------------------------------

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Aphantasia #FaceRecognition #Prosopagnosia #FacePerception #FaceMemory #VisualImagery #CortexStudy #CambridgeFaceMemoryTest #OxfordFaceMatchingTest #NeuroscienceResearch

DATE: July 25, 2026 at 08:00AM
SOURCE: PSYPOST.ORG

** Research quality varies widely from fantastic to small exploratory studies. Please check research methods when conclusions are very important to you. **
-------------------------------------------------

TITLE: Aphantasia is linked to specific face recognition deficits, but matching skills remain intact

URL: https://www.psypost.org/aphantasia-is-linked-to-specific-face-recognition-deficits-but-matching-skills-remain-intact/

People who lack a mind’s eye, a condition known as aphantasia, tend to struggle with recognizing faces. A recent study published in the journal Cortex provides evidence that these individuals have specific difficulties with perceiving and remembering faces, but not with visually matching them. The findings help explain the underlying mechanics of face blindness that many people with aphantasia experience.

Aphantasia is a psychological condition where a person has an absent or severely reduced ability to form visual images in their mind. When someone with typical visual imagery thinks of an apple, they can picture its shape and color. A person with aphantasia cannot produce this mental picture.

This lack of visual imagery suggests possible effects on other cognitive functions. Past research indicates that many people with aphantasia self-report difficulties with facial recognition. Some even meet the criteria for prosopagnosia, which is a neurological condition commonly known as face blindness.

Recognizing a face is not a single, simple action. It relies on a combination of different cognitive processes working together. Breaking down these individual steps helps scientists understand where cognitive deficits originate.

Mirta Stantić, a lecturer at Royal Holloway, University of London, and co-author of the study, explained the motivation behind the research. “We’ve been investigating profiles of face recognition abilities in different populations for years, and have already looked at populations of people who have face blindness, autism, or who are exceptionally good at remembering faces,” Stantić said. “Here, we were interested in figuring out how aphantasia, inability to form mental imagery, influences various phases of face recognition.”

The authors wanted to isolate specific sub-processes. “We wanted to understand whether some steps in this complex mental process are more affected than others, and whether this differs across individuals,” Stantić noted.

The researchers recruited 34 adults with congenital aphantasia, meaning they were born with the condition. They also recruited a control group of 41 adults with typical visual imagery abilities. The participants were roughly matched in age, with an average age of about 40 to 42 years old.

To confirm their group placements, participants completed the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire. This assessment asks people to rate the vividness of the mental images they can produce. People scoring very low were placed in the aphantasia group, and those scoring high were placed in the typical imagery group.

To test face matching and face perception, the participants completed the Oxford Face Matching Test. During this task, individuals saw 200 pairs of faces shown on a computer screen for just over one and a half seconds each. Half of the pairs showed two different photos of the same person, and half showed photos of two different people.

Participants first had to decide if the two faces belonged to the same person or different people. Then, they rated how perceptually similar the two faces looked on a scale from zero to one hundred. These ratings helped separate their basic decision-making from their visual perception.

To get a pure measurement of face perception, the scientists used a novel analytical strategy. They compared the human participants’ similarity ratings to similarity scores generated by three highly advanced facial recognition computer algorithms. If a participant’s rating deviated heavily from the computer algorithm’s objective rating, it indicated lower face perception abilities.

Next, the scientists tested face memory using the Cambridge Face Memory Test. In this assessment, participants learned to recognize six novel faces. They then had to identify these target faces among distractors across 72 trials, with the test growing progressively harder as the imagery changed.

The memory test is divided into three stages. The first stage presents faces with identical lighting and viewpoints. The later stages introduce drastic changes in how the faces are illuminated and oriented, forcing the brain to rely on a deep memory of the facial structure rather than a simple snapshot.

The researchers also asked participants to complete self-report surveys about their face recognition abilities in daily life. This included a twenty-item survey that asked them to rate statements about struggling to recognize classmates or friends. Finally, they conducted a visual acuity task where participants read shrinking rows of letters to ensure basic eyesight differences did not affect the outcomes.

The data showed that individuals with aphantasia reported much higher levels of face recognition difficulty in their everyday lives. About 26 percent of the aphantasia group scored above the strict threshold for face blindness on their self-report surveys. None of the typical imagers met this threshold.

Basic eyesight did not differ between the two groups on the visual acuity task. In addition, the participants completed a survey designed to measure autistic traits in adults. The researchers did not find a statistically significant difference in autistic traits between the aphantasia group and the control group, though the aphantasia group trended slightly higher.

The aphantasia group showed a noticeable impairment in face perception. Their similarity ratings on the paired face task deviated significantly more from the objective computer algorithm scores. This suggests that their basic perceptual processing of complex facial features is less precise.

This finding was somewhat unexpected based on past literature. “Some earlier research has suggested that visual perception is largely intact in aphantasia, but we found that participants with it were less accurate at perceptual face tasks,” Stantić told PsyPost. She suggested this might be because faces are highly complex visual stimuli.

“Additionally, this task required participants to make a judgment in a relatively short period of time and was designed to be challenging,” she added.

When it came to basic face matching, the aphantasia group performed just as well as the typical imagers. Both groups were equally accurate at deciding if two side-by-side photos showed the same person.

“Perhaps you would expect that, given difficulties in face perception and face memory, people with aphantasia would also struggle to accurately do face matching tasks,” Stantić said. “However, our results suggest that’s not the case.”

“Interestingly, their ability to disambiguate between two photographs (whether they show the same person or different people) is intact once we take into account their perceptual difficulties,” she noted.

To separate these intertwined skills, the researchers used statistical regression models. They were able to isolate memory performance by mathematically removing the influence of a person’s matching and perception scores. This allowed them to see the true, independent contribution of face memory.

The aphantasia group scored significantly lower on the memory test. Even after factoring out perception and matching abilities, the individuals with aphantasia still exhibited worse face memory than the control group.

“Aphantasia does not appear to cause a general inability to process faces, but people with aphantasia do have more difficulties with faces, as you would expect,” Stantić said.

“More broadly, this underscores the importance of understanding that face recognition is not a singular skill,” she added. “People can struggle with (or excel at) different aspects of this ability.”

One potential misinterpretation of this study is the assumption that all people with aphantasia have severe, clinical face blindness. The data shows that the majority of participants with aphantasia did not score low enough on the objective memory tests to be formally classified as having prosopagnosia. Their performance was simply weaker on average compared to typical imagers.

“Sometimes people think that folks with aphantasia have the same difficulties as people with prosopagnosia (who are often referred to as “face blind”) but this is not the case,” Stantić said. “There are distinct differences between the two populations and they face unique challenges.”

“Our data confirm this, as only about 10 percent of this sample with aphantasia scored clinically low on standard tests for prosopagnosia, clearly separating these samples,” Stantić explained. “The important thing to remember, therefore, is that there are subtle but crucial differences in experiences of people with aphantasia and prosopagnosia.”

The study also raises questions about exactly how visual imagery relates to perception. The authors note that mentally building a three-dimensional representation of a face from a two-dimensional photograph might require some level of mental imagery. It remains unknown if visual imagery is strictly necessary for face memory, or if the two functions merely rely on shared brain networks.

Future research could explore whether different subtypes of aphantasia exist. The researchers also hope to expand this work to other age groups. “In the future, we want to use this knowledge to understand how these abilities develop, or fail to develop, particularly in children of typical and atypical development,” Stantić said.

By using the new computer algorithm approach, the scientists can measure facial processing skills with greater precision. “This allows us to get a lot more targeted and precise with attempts to help those who have a hard time remembering faces,” she added. “We are hoping, in the long run, to develop programs that could help train people with difficulties.”

Gathering personal stories is a big part of that next step. “We are incredibly keen to hear from people with difficulties recognizing or remembering faces in everyday life or parents who think their children might be having a hard time with this,” Stantić said.

“First-hand accounts help us understand the range of experiences that may be missed by standard laboratory tests,” she explained. “These stories can directly inform the questions we investigate, as well as allow us to deliver targeted interventions.”

“If you want to be kept in touch with our research or potentially take part (we can come to you or often test remotely!), please contact us: mirtastantic.com.”

The study, “Individuals with aphantasia show independent impairments in face perception and face memory, but not face matching,” was authored by Zoë Pounder, Mirta Stantić, Reshanne Reeder, Caroline Catmur, and Geoffrey Bird.

URL: https://www.psypost.org/aphantasia-is-linked-to-specific-face-recognition-deficits-but-matching-skills-remain-intact/

-------------------------------------------------

Private, vetted email list for mental health professionals: https://www.clinicians-exchange.org

Unofficial Psychology Today Xitter to toot feed at Psych Today Unofficial Bot @PTUnofficialBot

-------------------------------------------------

#psychology #counseling #socialwork #psychotherapy @psychotherapist @psychotherapists @psychology @socialpsych @socialwork @psychiatry #mentalhealth #psychiatry #healthcare #depression #psychotherapist #Aphantasia #FaceRecognition #Prosopagnosia #FacePerception #FaceMemory #VisualImagery #CortexStudy #CambridgeFaceMemoryTest #OxfordFaceMatchingTest #NeuroscienceResearch

I presented my Honours research on comparing the rapid detection of Wild Faces vs. Posed expressions at #acns2023sydney today! Wraps up an epic year of work. Thanks to @jesstaubert for the photo ☺️

@acns_official #neuroscience #psychology #FacePerception

I presented my Honours research on comparing the rapid detection of Wild Faces vs. Posed expressions at #acns2023sydney today! Wraps up an epic year of work. Thanks to @jesstaubert for the photo ☺️

@acns_official #neuroscience #psychology #FacePerception

I presented my Honours research on comparing the rapid detection of Wild Faces vs. Posed expressions at #acns2023sydney today! Wraps up an epic year of work. Thanks to @jesstaubert for the photo ☺️

@acns_official #neuroscience #psychology #FacePerception

I presented my Honours research on comparing the rapid detection of Wild Faces vs. Posed expressions at #acns2023sydney today! Wraps up an epic year of work. Thanks to @jesstaubert for the photo ☺️

@acns_official #neuroscience #psychology #FacePerception

I presented my Honours research on comparing the rapid detection of Wild Faces vs. Posed expressions at #acns2023sydney today! Wraps up an epic year of work. Thanks to @jesstaubert for the photo ☺️

@acns_official #neuroscience #psychology #FacePerception

Damn, I’ve missed #psychophysics . A beautiful result today from a #FacePerception study.

Damn, I’ve missed #psychophysics . A beautiful result today from a #FacePerception study.

Damn, I’ve missed #psychophysics . A beautiful result today from a #FacePerception study.

Damn, I’ve missed #psychophysics . A beautiful result today from a #FacePerception study.

Are you a researcher working on visual cognition or some related field? Please drop your Mastodon handle here and we will follow you. Also feel free to point us to other accounts.
#VisualAttention #EyeMovements #ObjectPerception #FacePerception #VisualMemory #VisualStatistics #VisualPlasticity #VisualPerception #VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience

Are you a researcher working on visual cognition or some related field? Please drop your Mastodon handle here and we will follow you. Also feel free to point us to other accounts.
#VisualAttention #EyeMovements #ObjectPerception #FacePerception #VisualMemory #VisualStatistics #VisualPlasticity #VisualPerception #VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience

Are you a researcher working on visual cognition or some related field? Please drop your Mastodon handle here and we will follow you. Also feel free to point us to other accounts.
#VisualAttention #EyeMovements #ObjectPerception #FacePerception #VisualMemory #VisualStatistics #VisualPlasticity #VisualPerception #VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience

Are you a researcher working on visual cognition or some related field? Please drop your Mastodon handle here and we will follow you. Also feel free to point us to other accounts.
#VisualAttention #EyeMovements #ObjectPerception #FacePerception #VisualMemory #VisualStatistics #VisualPlasticity #VisualPerception #VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience

Are you a researcher working on visual cognition or some related field? Please drop your Mastodon handle here and we will follow you. Also feel free to point us to other accounts.
#VisualAttention #EyeMovements #ObjectPerception #FacePerception #VisualMemory #VisualStatistics #VisualPlasticity #VisualPerception #VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience

Wow. In 24 hours, we have gone from zero to 4.4K followers, that‘s crazy. Thank you for a warm welcome and excellent tips. I gave up on replying to all of you after someone pointed out that I was spamming thousands of people – sorry! Also, please do not read too much into it if we do not respond or take a long time responding, we are a busy bunch and may simply sometimes miss your post or messages. Mastodon allows long posts so I am taking advantage of that, so here are a few things that you may – or may not – want to know.

—Who are we?—

Research in the Icelandic Vision Lab (https://visionlab.is) focuses on all things visual, with a major emphasis on higher-level or “cognitive” aspects of visual perception. It is co-run by five Principal Investigators: Árni Gunnar Ásgeirsson, Sabrina Hansmann-Roth, Árni Kristjánsson, Inga María Ólafsdóttir, and Heida Maria Sigurdardottir. Here on Mastodon, you will most likely be interacting with me – Heida – but other PIs and potentially other lab members (https://visionlab.is/people) may occasionally also post here as this is a joint account. If our posts are stupid and/or annoying, I will however almost surely be responsible!

—What do we do?—

Current and/or past research at IVL has looked at several visual processes, including #VisualAttention , #EyeMovements , #ObjectPerception , #FacePerception , #VisualMemory , #VisualStatistics , and the role of #Experience / #Learning effects in #VisualPerception . Some of our work concerns the basic properties of the workings of the typical adult #VisualSystem . We have also studied the perceptual capabilities of several unique populations, including children, synesthetes, professional athletes, people with anxiety disorders, blind people, and dyslexic readers. We focus on #BehavioralMethods but also make use of other techniques including #Electrophysiology , #EyeTracking , and #DeepNeuralNetworks

—Why are we here?—

We are mostly here to interact with other researchers in our field, including graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and principal investigators. This means that our activity on Mastodon may sometimes be quite niche. This can include boosting posts from others on research papers, conferences, or work opportunities in specialized fields, partaking in discussions on debates in our field, data analysis, or the scientific review process. Science communication and outreach are hugely important, but this account is not about that as such. So we take no offence if that means that you will unfollow us, that is perfectly alright :)

—But will there still sometimes be stupid memes as promised?—

Yes. They may or may not be funny, but they will be stupid.

#VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience #StupidMemes

Wow. In 24 hours, we have gone from zero to 4.4K followers, that‘s crazy. Thank you for a warm welcome and excellent tips. I gave up on replying to all of you after someone pointed out that I was spamming thousands of people – sorry! Also, please do not read too much into it if we do not respond or take a long time responding, we are a busy bunch and may simply sometimes miss your post or messages. Mastodon allows long posts so I am taking advantage of that, so here are a few things that you may – or may not – want to know.

—Who are we?—

Research in the Icelandic Vision Lab (https://visionlab.is) focuses on all things visual, with a major emphasis on higher-level or “cognitive” aspects of visual perception. It is co-run by five Principal Investigators: Árni Gunnar Ásgeirsson, Sabrina Hansmann-Roth, Árni Kristjánsson, Inga María Ólafsdóttir, and Heida Maria Sigurdardottir. Here on Mastodon, you will most likely be interacting with me – Heida – but other PIs and potentially other lab members (https://visionlab.is/people) may occasionally also post here as this is a joint account. If our posts are stupid and/or annoying, I will however almost surely be responsible!

—What do we do?—

Current and/or past research at IVL has looked at several visual processes, including #VisualAttention , #EyeMovements , #ObjectPerception , #FacePerception , #VisualMemory , #VisualStatistics , and the role of #Experience / #Learning effects in #VisualPerception . Some of our work concerns the basic properties of the workings of the typical adult #VisualSystem . We have also studied the perceptual capabilities of several unique populations, including children, synesthetes, professional athletes, people with anxiety disorders, blind people, and dyslexic readers. We focus on #BehavioralMethods but also make use of other techniques including #Electrophysiology , #EyeTracking , and #DeepNeuralNetworks

—Why are we here?—

We are mostly here to interact with other researchers in our field, including graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and principal investigators. This means that our activity on Mastodon may sometimes be quite niche. This can include boosting posts from others on research papers, conferences, or work opportunities in specialized fields, partaking in discussions on debates in our field, data analysis, or the scientific review process. Science communication and outreach are hugely important, but this account is not about that as such. So we take no offence if that means that you will unfollow us, that is perfectly alright :)

—But will there still sometimes be stupid memes as promised?—

Yes. They may or may not be funny, but they will be stupid.

#VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience #StupidMemes

Wow. In 24 hours, we have gone from zero to 4.4K followers, that‘s crazy. Thank you for a warm welcome and excellent tips. I gave up on replying to all of you after someone pointed out that I was spamming thousands of people – sorry! Also, please do not read too much into it if we do not respond or take a long time responding, we are a busy bunch and may simply sometimes miss your post or messages. Mastodon allows long posts so I am taking advantage of that, so here are a few things that you may – or may not – want to know.

—Who are we?—

Research in the Icelandic Vision Lab (https://visionlab.is) focuses on all things visual, with a major emphasis on higher-level or “cognitive” aspects of visual perception. It is co-run by five Principal Investigators: Árni Gunnar Ásgeirsson, Sabrina Hansmann-Roth, Árni Kristjánsson, Inga María Ólafsdóttir, and Heida Maria Sigurdardottir. Here on Mastodon, you will most likely be interacting with me – Heida – but other PIs and potentially other lab members (https://visionlab.is/people) may occasionally also post here as this is a joint account. If our posts are stupid and/or annoying, I will however almost surely be responsible!

—What do we do?—

Current and/or past research at IVL has looked at several visual processes, including #VisualAttention , #EyeMovements , #ObjectPerception , #FacePerception , #VisualMemory , #VisualStatistics , and the role of #Experience / #Learning effects in #VisualPerception . Some of our work concerns the basic properties of the workings of the typical adult #VisualSystem . We have also studied the perceptual capabilities of several unique populations, including children, synesthetes, professional athletes, people with anxiety disorders, blind people, and dyslexic readers. We focus on #BehavioralMethods but also make use of other techniques including #Electrophysiology , #EyeTracking , and #DeepNeuralNetworks

—Why are we here?—

We are mostly here to interact with other researchers in our field, including graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and principal investigators. This means that our activity on Mastodon may sometimes be quite niche. This can include boosting posts from others on research papers, conferences, or work opportunities in specialized fields, partaking in discussions on debates in our field, data analysis, or the scientific review process. Science communication and outreach are hugely important, but this account is not about that as such. So we take no offence if that means that you will unfollow us, that is perfectly alright :)

—But will there still sometimes be stupid memes as promised?—

Yes. They may or may not be funny, but they will be stupid.

#VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience #StupidMemes

Wow. In 24 hours, we have gone from zero to 4.4K followers, that‘s crazy. Thank you for a warm welcome and excellent tips. I gave up on replying to all of you after someone pointed out that I was spamming thousands of people – sorry! Also, please do not read too much into it if we do not respond or take a long time responding, we are a busy bunch and may simply sometimes miss your post or messages. Mastodon allows long posts so I am taking advantage of that, so here are a few things that you may – or may not – want to know.

—Who are we?—

Research in the Icelandic Vision Lab (https://visionlab.is) focuses on all things visual, with a major emphasis on higher-level or “cognitive” aspects of visual perception. It is co-run by five Principal Investigators: Árni Gunnar Ásgeirsson, Sabrina Hansmann-Roth, Árni Kristjánsson, Inga María Ólafsdóttir, and Heida Maria Sigurdardottir. Here on Mastodon, you will most likely be interacting with me – Heida – but other PIs and potentially other lab members (https://visionlab.is/people) may occasionally also post here as this is a joint account. If our posts are stupid and/or annoying, I will however almost surely be responsible!

—What do we do?—

Current and/or past research at IVL has looked at several visual processes, including #VisualAttention , #EyeMovements , #ObjectPerception , #FacePerception , #VisualMemory , #VisualStatistics , and the role of #Experience / #Learning effects in #VisualPerception . Some of our work concerns the basic properties of the workings of the typical adult #VisualSystem . We have also studied the perceptual capabilities of several unique populations, including children, synesthetes, professional athletes, people with anxiety disorders, blind people, and dyslexic readers. We focus on #BehavioralMethods but also make use of other techniques including #Electrophysiology , #EyeTracking , and #DeepNeuralNetworks

—Why are we here?—

We are mostly here to interact with other researchers in our field, including graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and principal investigators. This means that our activity on Mastodon may sometimes be quite niche. This can include boosting posts from others on research papers, conferences, or work opportunities in specialized fields, partaking in discussions on debates in our field, data analysis, or the scientific review process. Science communication and outreach are hugely important, but this account is not about that as such. So we take no offence if that means that you will unfollow us, that is perfectly alright :)

—But will there still sometimes be stupid memes as promised?—

Yes. They may or may not be funny, but they will be stupid.

#VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience #StupidMemes

Wow. In 24 hours, we have gone from zero to 4.4K followers, that‘s crazy. Thank you for a warm welcome and excellent tips. I gave up on replying to all of you after someone pointed out that I was spamming thousands of people – sorry! Also, please do not read too much into it if we do not respond or take a long time responding, we are a busy bunch and may simply sometimes miss your post or messages. Mastodon allows long posts so I am taking advantage of that, so here are a few things that you may – or may not – want to know.

—Who are we?—

Research in the Icelandic Vision Lab (https://visionlab.is) focuses on all things visual, with a major emphasis on higher-level or “cognitive” aspects of visual perception. It is co-run by five Principal Investigators: Árni Gunnar Ásgeirsson, Sabrina Hansmann-Roth, Árni Kristjánsson, Inga María Ólafsdóttir, and Heida Maria Sigurdardottir. Here on Mastodon, you will most likely be interacting with me – Heida – but other PIs and potentially other lab members (https://visionlab.is/people) may occasionally also post here as this is a joint account. If our posts are stupid and/or annoying, I will however almost surely be responsible!

—What do we do?—

Current and/or past research at IVL has looked at several visual processes, including #VisualAttention , #EyeMovements , #ObjectPerception , #FacePerception , #VisualMemory , #VisualStatistics , and the role of #Experience / #Learning effects in #VisualPerception . Some of our work concerns the basic properties of the workings of the typical adult #VisualSystem . We have also studied the perceptual capabilities of several unique populations, including children, synesthetes, professional athletes, people with anxiety disorders, blind people, and dyslexic readers. We focus on #BehavioralMethods but also make use of other techniques including #Electrophysiology , #EyeTracking , and #DeepNeuralNetworks

—Why are we here?—

We are mostly here to interact with other researchers in our field, including graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, and principal investigators. This means that our activity on Mastodon may sometimes be quite niche. This can include boosting posts from others on research papers, conferences, or work opportunities in specialized fields, partaking in discussions on debates in our field, data analysis, or the scientific review process. Science communication and outreach are hugely important, but this account is not about that as such. So we take no offence if that means that you will unfollow us, that is perfectly alright :)

—But will there still sometimes be stupid memes as promised?—

Yes. They may or may not be funny, but they will be stupid.

#VisionScience #CognitivePsychology #CognitiveScience #CognitiveNeuroscience #StupidMemes

#introduction
Olá! I am a last year PhD fellow in #psychology. My work is being conducted at the #EmoSensesLab ('bird app'), University of Aveiro, PT

I am studying #emotion #cognition and #perception in #schizophrenia #psychoticdisorders. Other research topics include #MotionPerception #consciouness #FacePerception and #olfaction. And also super interested on #openscience #scicomm #statistics #methods and #selfcorrection.

Proud human of Fibas, the laziest (and most stylish) dog I ever meet

#introduction
Olá! I am a last year PhD fellow in #psychology. My work is being conducted at the #EmoSensesLab ('bird app'), University of Aveiro, PT

I am studying #emotion #cognition and #perception in #schizophrenia #psychoticdisorders. Other research topics include #MotionPerception #consciouness #FacePerception and #olfaction. And also super interested on #openscience #scicomm #statistics #methods and #selfcorrection.

Proud human of Fibas, the laziest (and most stylish) dog I ever meet

#introduction
Olá! I am a last year PhD fellow in #psychology. My work is being conducted at the #EmoSensesLab ('bird app'), University of Aveiro, PT

I am studying #emotion #cognition and #perception in #schizophrenia #psychoticdisorders. Other research topics include #MotionPerception #consciouness #FacePerception and #olfaction. And also super interested on #openscience #scicomm #statistics #methods and #selfcorrection.

Proud human of Fibas, the laziest (and most stylish) dog I ever meet

#introduction
Olá! I am a last year PhD fellow in #psychology. My work is being conducted at the #EmoSensesLab ('bird app'), University of Aveiro, PT

I am studying #emotion #cognition and #perception in #schizophrenia #psychoticdisorders. Other research topics include #MotionPerception #consciouness #FacePerception and #olfaction. And also super interested on #openscience #scicomm #statistics #methods and #selfcorrection.

Proud human of Fibas, the laziest (and most stylish) dog I ever meet

#introduction
Olá! I am a last year PhD fellow in #psychology. My work is being conducted at the #EmoSensesLab ('bird app'), University of Aveiro, PT

I am studying #emotion #cognition and #perception in #schizophrenia #psychoticdisorders. Other research topics include #MotionPerception #consciouness #FacePerception and #olfaction. And also super interested on #openscience #scicomm #statistics #methods and #selfcorrection.

Proud human of Fibas, the laziest (and most stylish) dog I ever meet

#introduction 👋 I’m a researcher studying #perception and #memory using #EEG and #TMS. My lectures are mostly about #BiologicalPsychology, #ResearchMethods, #Neuroimaging and #FacePerception.
Also, #Pythonista, #RaspberryPi and #Arduino enthusiast. Dabbling in piano and bass.
#TwitterMigration

#introduction 👋 I’m a researcher studying #perception and #memory using #EEG and #TMS. My lectures are mostly about #BiologicalPsychology, #ResearchMethods, #Neuroimaging and #FacePerception.
Also, #Pythonista, #RaspberryPi and #Arduino enthusiast. Dabbling in piano and bass.
#TwitterMigration

#introduction 👋 I’m a researcher studying #perception and #memory using #EEG and #TMS. My lectures are mostly about #BiologicalPsychology, #ResearchMethods, #Neuroimaging and #FacePerception.
Also, #Pythonista, #RaspberryPi and #Arduino enthusiast. Dabbling in piano and bass.
#TwitterMigration

#introduction 👋 I’m a researcher studying #perception and #memory using #EEG and #TMS. My lectures are mostly about #BiologicalPsychology, #ResearchMethods, #Neuroimaging and #FacePerception.
Also, #Pythonista, #RaspberryPi and #Arduino enthusiast. Dabbling in piano and bass.
#TwitterMigration