面孔与汉字认知加工机制中的倒置效应—行为学及ERP研究
|
摘要
面孔倒置效应的提出已经近四十年,但是对于它所揭示的意义到现在依然存在争论,有些研究者认为:倒置效应为面孔所独有,而且是面孔加工特异性的显著标志之一。虽然使用电生理、脑成像以及对脑损伤病人进行的神经心理学检查等手段,研究者已经找到选择性对面孔反应的脑区,然而,关于面孔的倒置效应是否其独有,且反应其特异性加工依然没有定论。还有研究者认为:面孔识别之所以特殊,是因为它要求在一个相对同质的物体范畴中,对亚范畴进行专家水平的分类,而人类是完成识别不同个体面孔的专家。因此,凡是对于具有专家技术的物类都可以出现倒置效应。因此,对于这个问题至今仍是争议的焦点。
而作为世界上独一无二的汉字,许多心理学研究正围绕对它的视觉识别问题展开。与面孔认知类似,每一个有读写能力的成年人都可以说是识别汉字的“专家”,但作为一种古老的象形文字,汉字具有二维图形特征,因而具有独特的研究优势。已有研究证实在大脑存在着对语词特异加工的脑区部位——视觉语词形成区(Visual Word Form Area, VWFA),对语言有着高效加工功能。这表明了对于汉字的专家加工机制具有其解剖和功能基础。然而目前对于汉字的认知研究大多集中在语义、语音方面,而对于汉字本身的识别与认知,由于缺乏有效的实验方法和范式,研究相对不足,对于汉字字形本身的早期视觉加工研究相对缺乏。
本研究试图通过对面孔和汉字倒置效应的行为学研究,深入探讨两者在认知加工机制上的异同,揭示倒置效应的本质;通过对面孔和汉字倒置效应的电生理学研究,进一步分析各个成分所代表的加工阶段和特征,并为深入研究其后续加工过程进行理论和实验的尝试与探索。
本研究采用诱导激活的实验范式,比较正常被试在不同的诱导条件下对相同刺激反应的差异。本实验主要由两大部分构成:行为学研究和电生学研究(ERP)。利用“品”型汉字独特的结构与面孔相结合进行认知研究。在行为学研究中,四组被试分别在不同的诱导刺激下(面孔vs.字母、汉字vs.字母),在不同的认知条件下(倒置vs.旋转)对相同的比较刺激(品)的不同特征变化(结构特征vs.局部特征)进行认知加工,比较被试对比较刺激认知差异;第二部分为ERP实验,四组被试分别在不同的诱导刺激下(面孔vs.字母、汉字vs.字母),在不同的认知条件下(倒置vs.旋转)对相同的比较刺激(品)的方向进行判断,比较被试对相同刺激认知差异,并对其反应时、不同成分的潜伏期、波幅进行比较。
通过本研究可以得到的主要结论如下:
在本研究中,我们不仅在发现了面孔的倒置效应,而且在汉字组也发现了确切的倒置效应,同样的视觉刺激(比较刺激)在同样的任务中由于诱导条件不同,诱发了被试不同的认知加工策略,出现不同的反应模式。两种截然相对的倒置效应同时出现说明:倒置效应并非面孔效应所特有。虽然面孔的倒置效应是一个不依赖于实验范式的相对稳定的反应模式,但当被试认知任何具有共同结构和高度熟悉的刺激类型(如汉字),并经过长期的经验对其形成专家知识和技能时,都可以出现倒置效应,因此,面孔认知的倒置效应不能作为面孔认知特异加工的证据。同时,该结果充分支持了专家假说对倒置效应的解释。
倒置面孔和汉字可能采取了一种不同于正立刺激的认知加工策略,在旋转120度左右出现认知策略的转换,反应时与角度的差异呈现非线性的关系。在本研究中,在面孔和汉字认知时,倒置效应在结构变化条件下显现和在局部变化条件下缺失支持了倒置时对两者结构性信息加工的破坏,从而说明了专家系统中结构性认知的作用。
在Bruce-Young的模型中的直接视觉处理、结构编码、表情分析和面孔语言分析前还应有一个分类处理阶段,即在早期视觉加工阶段中的简单视觉分类阶段。
面孔刺激的P1成分在面孔认知中并不是简单地反映低层次的视觉差异,而是反映了对面孔的整体认知,即将图形知觉为面孔。甚至部分地涉及了面孔结构加工。而汉字的早期知觉加工始自P1,以左侧脑区为主,在后续认知中双侧脑区共同作用。
N170并非是面孔特异性成分,也并不是对面孔和非面孔刺激之间的低层次视觉变化的反映(Rossion, Gauthier, Tarr, Despland, Bruyer, Linotte, 2000)而是反映对多种物类具有的专家技术,即可以反映物类的专家式的加工。
视觉刺激倒置可能主要影响面孔和汉字的潜伏期,而心理旋转则可能主要引起了波幅的改变。
总之,面孔识别和汉字识别都是人们社会生活中的重要功能,本研究对两者的认知加工的异同的探索进行了有益的尝试。相信随着认知神经科学的发展和脑功能成像和电生理技术的不断进步,我们会对两者的神经基础及其结构功能获得更为系统和全面的认识。
For about four decades, behavioral studies have revealed that picture-plane inversion dramatically impairs face recognition, which lead to the discussion of what its essence is. Some people think that the inversion effect is unique to faces, and this finding is regarded as evidence that the visual system uses special perceptual processing for faces different from the processing of other non-face objects. Though the selective face-specific areas in the brain have been found by the electrophysiological and neuroimaging studies, it’s still an inconclusive discussion. Other people deem that faces are special, because subjects are required to make visual subordinate-level categorization that concerns expertise in the comparatively homogenous category, and that human beings are expert at discriminating faces at individual levels. Therefore, every category of visual stimuli would show inversion effect, if only people acquire the experise of such visual stimuli. So far, this issue is still the focus of argument.
The unique character, Chinese character, has become more and more popular in the visual cognition. Every literate Chinese adult is an expert at discriminating Chinese characters that possess two-dimension features and have advantages over other words as an old type of hieroglyph. It has been found that there is word-specific brain cortex that is named Visual Word Form Area (VWFA) and has effective functions of processing languages. Such findings indicate that there should be anatomic and functional elements of processing Chinese characters. However, more studies focus on the semantic and speech research, the grapheme research is comparatively insufficient, because the effective experimental methods and paradigms are difficult to find, and especially for the research about the early visual processing of Chinese characters themselves.
The present research tries to study the behavioral results of inversion effect of faces and Chinese characters so as to compare these two cognitive mechanisms. What’s more, the electrophysiological research is also employed to explore the processing stages and features of the faces and Chinese characters further. In addition, such results can be used for reference to make more exploration and trials.
The contextual priming paradigm was used in the present study, and the whole research consisted of two main parts: the behavioral study and ERP study. In the former study, four groups of subjects were induced to respond to the same comparison stimuli in two paradigms (faces vs. English letters, Chinese characters vs. English letters), two cognitive conditions (inversion vs. rotation), and two kinds of changes (configural changes vs. featural changes). The latter study, similar to the former, concerned ERP in which subjects were required to judge the orientation of the stimuli. At last, we compared the reaction time, ERP’s latencies and amplitudes.
Some main conclusions were drawn as follows:
We found inversion effect not only in recognition of faces, but also in that of Chinese characters, and the subjects responded to the same stimuli in different ways according to the different contextual priming conditions. The two inversion effects were opposite, which definitely demonstrated that inversion effect of faces was independent of experimental paradigm, however, other stimuli could also show this effect, as long as they acquired the common configuration and were very familiar to the human beings who were able to possess expertise in such stimuli by long-term experience. Therefore, the inversion effect couldn’t be regarded as the evidence that there was a unique processing stage for faces. By contrast, our results corroborated thoroughly the explanation of expertise hyhothesis for inversion effect.
When we processed the up-side-down faces or Chinese characters, some certain strategies, different from that of processing upright stimuli, were employed, and the shift of the ways of cognitions might happen at an angle of 120 degrees. The regression results showed that there were nonlinear relationships between reaction times and angles. As a rule, the inversion effect only appeared in configural changes and was absent in featural changes, which indicated that inversion mainly impaired the processing of configural information, and such processing made senses in expertise system too.
In the model of Bruce-Young, there should be a coarse visual categorization before direct visual processing, configural encoding, and analysis of expression and so on.
P1 should be thought to represent an earlier face-specific processing stage as early as 100-120 ms following stimulus onset rather than simply reflect the low-level visual difference. What’s more, it might partly concern configural processing. As for the Chinese character, the early perception stage might originate from P1, and have left advantages over right, which might be followed by the bilateral processing.
N170 should not be considered as the face-specific component, neither the reflection of low-level visual difference between faces and non-face stimuli. It should be considered as the reflection of expertise.
The inversion of the visual stimuli was likely to delay the laencies of faces and Chinese characters; however, the mental rotation might probably influence the amplitudes.
To sum up, the cognition of faces and Chinese characters are both crucial social functions in our life, and our research made a meaningful attempt to compare the two important visual stimuli. It’s believable that human beings will get more systematic understanding about their neurobiological bases and functions with the development of cognitve neuroscience, brain neuroimaging and electrophysiological technology.
而作为世界上独一无二的汉字,许多心理学研究正围绕对它的视觉识别问题展开。与面孔认知类似,每一个有读写能力的成年人都可以说是识别汉字的“专家”,但作为一种古老的象形文字,汉字具有二维图形特征,因而具有独特的研究优势。已有研究证实在大脑存在着对语词特异加工的脑区部位——视觉语词形成区(Visual Word Form Area, VWFA),对语言有着高效加工功能。这表明了对于汉字的专家加工机制具有其解剖和功能基础。然而目前对于汉字的认知研究大多集中在语义、语音方面,而对于汉字本身的识别与认知,由于缺乏有效的实验方法和范式,研究相对不足,对于汉字字形本身的早期视觉加工研究相对缺乏。
本研究试图通过对面孔和汉字倒置效应的行为学研究,深入探讨两者在认知加工机制上的异同,揭示倒置效应的本质;通过对面孔和汉字倒置效应的电生理学研究,进一步分析各个成分所代表的加工阶段和特征,并为深入研究其后续加工过程进行理论和实验的尝试与探索。
本研究采用诱导激活的实验范式,比较正常被试在不同的诱导条件下对相同刺激反应的差异。本实验主要由两大部分构成:行为学研究和电生学研究(ERP)。利用“品”型汉字独特的结构与面孔相结合进行认知研究。在行为学研究中,四组被试分别在不同的诱导刺激下(面孔vs.字母、汉字vs.字母),在不同的认知条件下(倒置vs.旋转)对相同的比较刺激(品)的不同特征变化(结构特征vs.局部特征)进行认知加工,比较被试对比较刺激认知差异;第二部分为ERP实验,四组被试分别在不同的诱导刺激下(面孔vs.字母、汉字vs.字母),在不同的认知条件下(倒置vs.旋转)对相同的比较刺激(品)的方向进行判断,比较被试对相同刺激认知差异,并对其反应时、不同成分的潜伏期、波幅进行比较。
通过本研究可以得到的主要结论如下:
在本研究中,我们不仅在发现了面孔的倒置效应,而且在汉字组也发现了确切的倒置效应,同样的视觉刺激(比较刺激)在同样的任务中由于诱导条件不同,诱发了被试不同的认知加工策略,出现不同的反应模式。两种截然相对的倒置效应同时出现说明:倒置效应并非面孔效应所特有。虽然面孔的倒置效应是一个不依赖于实验范式的相对稳定的反应模式,但当被试认知任何具有共同结构和高度熟悉的刺激类型(如汉字),并经过长期的经验对其形成专家知识和技能时,都可以出现倒置效应,因此,面孔认知的倒置效应不能作为面孔认知特异加工的证据。同时,该结果充分支持了专家假说对倒置效应的解释。
倒置面孔和汉字可能采取了一种不同于正立刺激的认知加工策略,在旋转120度左右出现认知策略的转换,反应时与角度的差异呈现非线性的关系。在本研究中,在面孔和汉字认知时,倒置效应在结构变化条件下显现和在局部变化条件下缺失支持了倒置时对两者结构性信息加工的破坏,从而说明了专家系统中结构性认知的作用。
在Bruce-Young的模型中的直接视觉处理、结构编码、表情分析和面孔语言分析前还应有一个分类处理阶段,即在早期视觉加工阶段中的简单视觉分类阶段。
面孔刺激的P1成分在面孔认知中并不是简单地反映低层次的视觉差异,而是反映了对面孔的整体认知,即将图形知觉为面孔。甚至部分地涉及了面孔结构加工。而汉字的早期知觉加工始自P1,以左侧脑区为主,在后续认知中双侧脑区共同作用。
N170并非是面孔特异性成分,也并不是对面孔和非面孔刺激之间的低层次视觉变化的反映(Rossion, Gauthier, Tarr, Despland, Bruyer, Linotte, 2000)而是反映对多种物类具有的专家技术,即可以反映物类的专家式的加工。
视觉刺激倒置可能主要影响面孔和汉字的潜伏期,而心理旋转则可能主要引起了波幅的改变。
总之,面孔识别和汉字识别都是人们社会生活中的重要功能,本研究对两者的认知加工的异同的探索进行了有益的尝试。相信随着认知神经科学的发展和脑功能成像和电生理技术的不断进步,我们会对两者的神经基础及其结构功能获得更为系统和全面的认识。
For about four decades, behavioral studies have revealed that picture-plane inversion dramatically impairs face recognition, which lead to the discussion of what its essence is. Some people think that the inversion effect is unique to faces, and this finding is regarded as evidence that the visual system uses special perceptual processing for faces different from the processing of other non-face objects. Though the selective face-specific areas in the brain have been found by the electrophysiological and neuroimaging studies, it’s still an inconclusive discussion. Other people deem that faces are special, because subjects are required to make visual subordinate-level categorization that concerns expertise in the comparatively homogenous category, and that human beings are expert at discriminating faces at individual levels. Therefore, every category of visual stimuli would show inversion effect, if only people acquire the experise of such visual stimuli. So far, this issue is still the focus of argument.
The unique character, Chinese character, has become more and more popular in the visual cognition. Every literate Chinese adult is an expert at discriminating Chinese characters that possess two-dimension features and have advantages over other words as an old type of hieroglyph. It has been found that there is word-specific brain cortex that is named Visual Word Form Area (VWFA) and has effective functions of processing languages. Such findings indicate that there should be anatomic and functional elements of processing Chinese characters. However, more studies focus on the semantic and speech research, the grapheme research is comparatively insufficient, because the effective experimental methods and paradigms are difficult to find, and especially for the research about the early visual processing of Chinese characters themselves.
The present research tries to study the behavioral results of inversion effect of faces and Chinese characters so as to compare these two cognitive mechanisms. What’s more, the electrophysiological research is also employed to explore the processing stages and features of the faces and Chinese characters further. In addition, such results can be used for reference to make more exploration and trials.
The contextual priming paradigm was used in the present study, and the whole research consisted of two main parts: the behavioral study and ERP study. In the former study, four groups of subjects were induced to respond to the same comparison stimuli in two paradigms (faces vs. English letters, Chinese characters vs. English letters), two cognitive conditions (inversion vs. rotation), and two kinds of changes (configural changes vs. featural changes). The latter study, similar to the former, concerned ERP in which subjects were required to judge the orientation of the stimuli. At last, we compared the reaction time, ERP’s latencies and amplitudes.
Some main conclusions were drawn as follows:
We found inversion effect not only in recognition of faces, but also in that of Chinese characters, and the subjects responded to the same stimuli in different ways according to the different contextual priming conditions. The two inversion effects were opposite, which definitely demonstrated that inversion effect of faces was independent of experimental paradigm, however, other stimuli could also show this effect, as long as they acquired the common configuration and were very familiar to the human beings who were able to possess expertise in such stimuli by long-term experience. Therefore, the inversion effect couldn’t be regarded as the evidence that there was a unique processing stage for faces. By contrast, our results corroborated thoroughly the explanation of expertise hyhothesis for inversion effect.
When we processed the up-side-down faces or Chinese characters, some certain strategies, different from that of processing upright stimuli, were employed, and the shift of the ways of cognitions might happen at an angle of 120 degrees. The regression results showed that there were nonlinear relationships between reaction times and angles. As a rule, the inversion effect only appeared in configural changes and was absent in featural changes, which indicated that inversion mainly impaired the processing of configural information, and such processing made senses in expertise system too.
In the model of Bruce-Young, there should be a coarse visual categorization before direct visual processing, configural encoding, and analysis of expression and so on.
P1 should be thought to represent an earlier face-specific processing stage as early as 100-120 ms following stimulus onset rather than simply reflect the low-level visual difference. What’s more, it might partly concern configural processing. As for the Chinese character, the early perception stage might originate from P1, and have left advantages over right, which might be followed by the bilateral processing.
N170 should not be considered as the face-specific component, neither the reflection of low-level visual difference between faces and non-face stimuli. It should be considered as the reflection of expertise.
The inversion of the visual stimuli was likely to delay the laencies of faces and Chinese characters; however, the mental rotation might probably influence the amplitudes.
To sum up, the cognition of faces and Chinese characters are both crucial social functions in our life, and our research made a meaningful attempt to compare the two important visual stimuli. It’s believable that human beings will get more systematic understanding about their neurobiological bases and functions with the development of cognitve neuroscience, brain neuroimaging and electrophysiological technology.
引文
Aaltonen O, Paavilainen P, Sams M Naatanen R. Event-related brain potentials and discrimination of steady-state vowels within and between phoneme categories: A preliminary study. Scand. J. Log. Phon., 1992, 17: 107-112.
Adolphs R, Tranel, D, Damasio, H et al. Impaired recognition of emotion in facial expression following bilateral damage to the human amygdala. Nature, 1994, 372: 669-672.
Aguirre, G.K., Singh, R. & D’Esposito, M.. Stimulus inversion and the responses of face and object-sensitive cortical areas. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 189-194.
Aguirre, G.K., Zarahn, E. & D'Esposito, M. An area within human ventral cortex sensitive to "building" stimuli: Evidence and implications. Neuron, 1998; 21, 373-383.
Allison T, McCarthy G, Nobre A et al.Human extrastriate visual cortex and the perception of faces,words,numbers,and colors. Cerebral Cortex, 1994, 5:544-554.
Allison, T., Puce, A., Spencer, D.D. & McCarthy, G. Electrophysiological studies of human face perception: potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex by face and nonface stimuli. Cerebral Cortex, 1999; 9, 415-430.
Andrews T J, Ewbank M P. Distinct representations for facial identity and changeable aspects of faces in the human temporal lobe. NeuroImage, 2004, 23: 905-913.
Banich, M.T. and Belger, A. Interhemispheric interaction: How do the hemispheres divide and conquer a task. Cortex 1990; 26, 79-94.
Bartlett, J.C. & Searcy, J. Inversion and configuration of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 1993; 25, 281-316.
B?uml, K.H. Upright versus upside-down faces: How interface attractiveness varies with orientation. Perception and Psychophysics, 1994; 56(2): 163–172.
B?uml, K.H., Schnelzer, M., & Zimmer, A. The influence of inversion on the judgment of facial and non-facial attributes. Acta Psychologica, 1997; 96(1):27–42.
Bentin, S., Allison, T., Puce, A., Perez, A. & McCarthy, G. Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1996; 8, 551-565.
Bentin, S. & Deouell, L. Structural encoding and identification in face processing: ERP evidence for separate mechanisms. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000; 17, 35-54.
Bentin, S., Deouell, L.Y. & Soroker, N. Selective visual streaming in face recognition: evidence from developmental prosopagnosia. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 823-827.
Bentin S, Kutas M, Hillyard S A. Electrophysiological evidence for task effects on semantic priming in auditory word processing. Psychophysiology, 1993, 30: 161-169.
Bentin S, Kutas M, Hillyard S A. Semantic processing and memory for attended and unattended words in dichotic listening: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. J. Exp. Psychol.: Human Perception and Performance. 1995,24: 54-67.
Biederman I. Higher-level vision. Visual cognition and action: an invitation to cognitive science. CambridgeMA: MIT Press, 1990.
Bodamer, J.. Die-Prosop-agnosie. Arch. Psychiatr. Nervenkrankh., 1947; 179, 6-54.English translation by par Ellis, H.D. & Florence, M. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 1990; 7, 81-105.
Bosbach, S, Knoblich, G.., Reed, C.L., Cole, J., & Prinz, W. Body inversion effect without body sense: Insights from deafferentation. Neuropsychologia, 2006;44, 2950-2958.
Botzel K,Schulze S,Stodieck SRG.Scalp topography and analysis of intracranial sources of face-evoked potentials. Experimental Brain Research,l995; 104(1):134—143.
Bradshaw, J.L., Taylor, M.J., Patterson, K. & Neettleton, N.C. Upright and inverted faces, and housefronts, in two visual fields: A right and a left hemisphere contribution. Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, 1980; 2, 245-257.
Bradshaw, J.L. & Wallace, G. Models for the processing and identification of faces. Perception and Psychophysics, 1971; 9, 443-448.
Braeutigam, S., Bailey, A.J., Swithenby, S.J. Task-dependent early latency (30-60ms) visual processing of human faces and other objects. Neuroreport, 2001 12, 1531-1536.
Bruce, V. Changing faces: Visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 1982; 73, 105-116.
Bruce, V. & Green, P. Visual Perception: Physiology, Psychology and Ecology. London: Erlbaum. 1985.
Bruce V, Young A. Understanding face recognition. Britain Journal of Psychology, 1986, 77: 305-327
26. Bruyer, R. Cerebral and behavioural asymmetries in the processing of ‘unusual’ faces: A revies. In H.D. Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986a.
Bruyer, R. The Neuropsycbology of Face Perception and Facial Expression. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum. 1986b.
Bruyer, R., Laterre, C., Seron, X., Feyereisen, P. Stryptien, E., Pierrard, E. & Rectem, D. A case of prosopagnosia with some preserved covert remembrance of familiar faces. Brain and Cognition, 1983; 2, 257-284.
Bruyer, R. & Velge, V. Lesions Cérébrale unilateral et trouble de la perception des visages:Specificité du deficit? Acta Neurological Belgica, 1981; 81, 321-332.
Bukach, C.M., Gauthier, I., & Tarr M. J. Beyond faces and modularity: the power of an expertise framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2006,10(4):159-166
Cabeza R, Kingstone A. Handbook of Functional Neuroimaging of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1999.
Calder A J, Keane J, Cole J et al. Facial expression recognition by people with M?bius syndrome. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17: 73-87.
Calis, G. & Mens, L. Primary stages in single-glance face recognition: Expression and identity. In H.D.Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F.Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing.Dordrecht:Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Calvert G, Bullmore E T, Brammer M J et al. Activation of auditory cortex during silent lip-reading. Science, 1997, 276: 593-596.
Campanella, S., Hanoteau, C., Depy, D., Rossion, B., Bruyer, R., Crommelinck, M. & Guerit, J.M. Right N170 modulation in a face discrimination task: An account for categorical perception of familiar faces. Psychophysiology, 2000; 37, 796-806.
Carey, S. The development of face perception. In G.Davies, H.Ellis & J.Shepherd (Eds), Perceiving and Remembering Faces. London:Academic Press. 1981.
Carey, S.& Diamond, R. From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. Science, 1977; 195, 312-314.
Carey, S. Diamond, R. & Woods, B. The development of face recognition a maturational component? Developmental Psychology, 1980; 16, 257-269.
Cauquil, A.S., Edmonds, G.E. & Taylor, M.J. Is the face-sensitive N170 the only ERP not affected by selective attention? Neuroreport, 2000; 11 (10): 2167-2171.
Chance, J.E., Turner, A. L. & Golbstein, A. G. Development of face recognition for own and other-race faces. Journal of Psychology, 1982; 112: 29-37.
Chao L L, Haxby J V, Martin A. Attribute-based neural substrates in temporal cortex for perceiving and knowing objects. Nature Neuroscience, 1999; 2: 913-919.
CheeMW, Cap lan D, Soon CS, et al. Processing of visually p resented sentences inMandarin and English studied with fMR I. Neuron, 1999, 23: 127-137.
Chee MW, Tan EW, Thiel T. Mandarin and English single word processing studied with functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci, 1999; 19: 3050-3056.
Chen, Y., Fu, S., Iversen, S.D., Smith, S.M., & Matthews, P.M. Testing for dual brain processing routes in reading: A direct contrast of Chinese character and Pinyin reading using fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2002;14(7): 1088–1098.
Chen Ying, Peng Daling. A connectionistmodel of Chinese character recognition and naming. Taipei: Advance in the study of Chinese language processing.1994.
Clark VP, Hillyard SA. Spatial selective attention affects early extrastriate components of the visual evoked potential. J Cogn Neurosci 1996; 8: 387-402.
Collishaw, S.M & Hole, J.C. Featural and configurational processes in the recognition of faces of different familiarity. Perception, 2000; 29 (8): 893-909.
Cross, J.F., Cross, J. & Daley, J. Sex, race, age and beauty as factors in recognition of faces. Perception and Psychopbysics, 1971; 10, 393-396.
Curran, T., Tanaka, J.W., Weiskopf, D.M. Differentiating object categorization and recognition processes: A high density ERP study. Poster presented at the 7th Human Brain Mapping Conference, Brighton, UK, June 2001.
Davidoff, J.B. The specificity of face perception: Evidence from psychological investigations. In R. Bruyer (Ed.), Tbe Neuropsychology of Face Perception and Facial Expression. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum. 1986.
Davies, G.M., Ellis, H.D. & Shepherd, j.w. Cue saliency in faces as assessed by the photofit technique. Perception, 1977; 6, 263-269.
de Gelder B, Rouw R. Configural face processes in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia: evidence for two separate face system. Neuroreport, 2000, 11: 3145-3150.
de Gelder B, Rouw R. Paradoxical configuration effects for faces and objects in prosopagnosia. Neuropsychologia, 2000, 38: 1271-1279.
De Valois RL, De Valois KK. Spatial Vision. Oxford Univ. Press: New York; 1990.
Diamond, R. & Carey, S. Developmental changes in the representation of faces. Journal of Experimental Cbild Psychology, 1977; 23, 1-22.
Diamond, R. & Carey, S. Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1986; 115, 107-117.
Dziurawiec, S. Neonates’attention to faces. Paper presented at ESRC workshop ‘Developmental Aspects of Face Recognition’, Grange over Sands. 1987.
Edelman, S. Representation, similarity, and the chorus of prototypes. Minds and machines, 1995; 5, 45-68.
Eimer M.The face specific N170 component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces.Neuroreport, 2000; 11(10):2319-24.
Eimer, M. Does the face-specific N170 component reflect the activity of a specialized eye processor? Neuroreport, 1998; 9, 2945-2948.
Eimer, M. Effects of face inversion on the structural encoding and recognition of faces - Evidence from event-related brain potentials, Cognitive Brain Research, 2000a; 10, 145-158.
Eimer, M. The face-specific N170 component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces. Neuroreport, 2000b; 11 (10):2319-2324.
Eimer, M. & McCarthy, R.A. Prosopagnosia and structural encoding of faces: Evidence from event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 1999; 10(2): 255-259.
Ellis A W, Young A W, Flude B M. Repetition priming and face processing: Priming occurs within the system that responds to the identity of a face. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 1990, 42(A): 495-512.
Ellis, H.D. Recognizing faces. Britisb journal of Psychology. 1975; 66, 409-426.
Ellis, H.DThe role of the right hemisphere in face perception. In A. W. Young (Ed.), Functions of the Right Hemisphere. London:Academic Press.1983;
Ellis, H.D. Processes underlying face recognition. In R. Bruyer (Ed.), The Neuropsychology of Face Perception and Facial Expression. Hillsdale, Nj: Erlbaum. 1986a.
Ellis, H.D. Introduction to aspects of face processing: Ten questions in need of answers. In H.D. Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986b.
Ellis, H. D. & Shepherd, J. W. Recognition of upright and inverted faces presented in the left and right visual fields. Cortex, 1975; 11, 3-7.
Ellis, H. D. & Young, A. W. Are faces special? In A. W. Young & H. D. Ellis (Eds); Handbook of Research on Face Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland .1988.
Endo N, Endo M, Kirita T, Maruyama K. The effects of expression on face recognition. Tohoku Psychologica Folia.1992, 51: 37-44.
Endo, M. Cue saliency in upside-down faces. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1982; 41, 116-122.
Endo, M. Cue saliency in brietly presented faces: A comparison with cue saliency in upside-down faces. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1983; 42, 85-91.
Endo, M. Perception of upside-down faces: An analysis from the viewpoint of cue saliency. In H.D. Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Epstein R, & Kanwisher, N. A cortical representation of the local visual environment, Nature, 1998; 392, 598-601.
Epstein, R., Harris, A., Stanley, D. & Kanwisher, N. The parahippocampal place area: recognition, navigation or encoding? Neuron, 1999; 23, 115-125.
Epstein, R.A., Higgins, J. S., Parker, W., Aguirre, G. K., & Cooperman, S. Cortical correlates of face and scene inversion: A comparison. Neuropsychologia, 2006; 44, 1145-1158.
Fagan, J. F. Infant’s recognition memory for faces. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1972; 14:453-476.
Fagan, J.F. Origins of facial pattern recognition. In M.H. Bornstein & W. Kessen (Eds), Psychological Development in Infancy: Image to Intention. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 1979.
Fagan, J.F. & Shepherd, P. A. Infants’ perception of orientation. Infant Behaviour and Development, 1979; 2,227-233.
Farah M J,Levinson K L,Klein K L.Face perception and within-category discrimination in prosopagnosia.Neuropsychologia,1995,33:661-674.
Farah M, Rabinowitz C, Quinn G et al. Early Commitment of Neural Substrates for Face Recognition. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17(1/2/3): 117-123.
Farah, M.J., Tanaka, J.W. & Drain, H.M. What causes the face inversion effect. Journal of experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1995; 21, 628-634.
Farah M J, Wilson K D, Drain HM et al., The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms.Vision Research, 1995; 35:2089-2093.
Farah, M.J., Wilson, K.D., Drain, M. & Tanaka, J.N. What is "special" about face perception? Psychological Review, 1998; 105, 482-498.
Feinman, S. & Entwisle, D. R. Children’s ability to recognize other children’s faces. Child Development. 1976; 47, 506-510.
Flin, R.H. Age effects in children’s memory for unfamiliar faces. Developmental Psychology, 1980; 16, 373-374.
Flin, R. H. Development of face recognition: An encoding switch? British Journal of Psychology, 1985; 76, 123-134.
Fodor, J. A. The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1983. Freeman, J. M. & Ellis, H. D. The effects of stimulus and subject factors on a face matching task. Neuropsychologica, 1984; 22, 635-638.
Freire A., Lee, K. & Symons, L.A. The face-inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: Direct evidence. Perception, 2000; 29,159-170.
Friederici AD. Neurophysiological aspects of language processing J.Clin-Neurosci,1997,4(2):64-72.
Galper, R. E. Recognition of faces in photographic negative. Psychonomic Science, 1970; 19, 207-208.
Galper, R. E. & Hochberg, J. Recognition memory for photographs of faces. American Journal of Psychology, 1971; 84, 351-354.
Gandour J, WongD, Hsieh L, et al. A crosslinguistic PET study of tone percep tion. J Cogn Neurosci, 2000, 12: 207-222.
Gauthier, I. Dissecting Face Recognition: The Role of Categorization Level and Expertise in Visual Object Recognition. Unpublished Dissertation,Yale University. 1998.
Gauthier, I., Anderson, A., Skudlarski, P. & Gore, J.C. Expertise for cars and birds recruits middle fusiform face-selective areas, Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 191-197. Gauthier I, Behrmann M, Tarr M J. Can face recognition really be dissociated from object recognition? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1999, 11: 349-370.
Gauthier, I. & Tarr, M.J. Becoming a “Greeble” expert: exploring the facerecognition mechanism. Vision Research, 1997; 37, 1673-1682.
Gauthier, I., Tarr, M.J., Anderson, A.W., Skudlarski, P. & Gore, J.C. Activation of the middle fusiform area increases with expertise in recognizing novel objects. Nature Neuroscience, 1999; 6, 568-573.
Gauthier, I., Tarr, M. J., Moylan, J., Skudlarski, P., Gore, J. C., & Anderson, A.W. The fusiform "face area" is part of a network that processes faces at the individual level. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2000; 12(3): 495-504.
Gauthier, I., Williams, P., Tarr, M.J. & Tanaka, J. Training ‘greeble’ experts: a framework for studying expert object recognition processes. Vision Research, 1998; 38, 2401-2428.
Gelder, B. & Zoontjes, R. Hemispheric asymmetries for whole-based and parts-based face processing in the human fusiform gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2000b; 12, 793-802.
George N, Evans J, Fiori N, Davidoff J, Renault B. Brain events related to normal and moderately scrambled faces..Cognitive Brain Research, 1996; 4(2):65-76.
George N,Jemel B,Fiori N et al Face and shape repetition effects in humans:A spatio-ternporal ERP study.Neuroreport,1997; 8:1417-1423.
Gibling, F., Ellis, H.D. & Shepherd, J. W. The influence of distinctiveness in the recognition of faces. Paper presented at ESRC workshop ‘Developmental Aspects of Face Recognition’, Grange over Sands. 1987.
Gilbert, C. & Bakan, P. Visual asymmetry in perception of faces. Neuropsychologia, 1973; 11, 355-362.
Goldstein, A. G. Learning of inverted and normally oriented faces in children and adults. Psychonomic Science, 1965; 3, 447-448.
Goldstein, A. G. Recognition of inverted photographs of faces in children and adults. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1975; 127, 109-123.
Goldstein, A. G. & Chance, J. E. Memory for faces and schema theory. Journal of Psychology, 1980; 105, 47-59.
Goldstein, A, G. & Chance, J. E. Laboratory studies of face recognition. In G. Davies, H. Ellis & J. Shepherd Eds; Perceiving and Remembering Faces. London: Academic Press. 1981.
Goren, C. C., Sarty, M. & Wu, P. Visual following and pattern discrimination of face-like stimuli by newborn infants. Pediatrics, 1975; 56, 544-545.
Gregory, R. L. The confounded eye. In R. L. Gregory & E. H. Gombrich Eds; Illusion in Nature and Art. London: Duckworth. 1973.
Grice, S.J., Spratling, M.W., Karmilnoff-Smith, A., Halit, H., Csibra, G, deHaan, M. & Johnson, M.H. 2001; Disordered visual processing and oscillatory brain activity in autism and Williams Syndrome. Neuroreport, 12, 2697-2700.
Goldstone, R.L., Schyns, P.G. & Medin, D.L. (Eds).; The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 36, pp.83-125. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Guillaume, F. & Tiberghien, G. An event-related potential study of contextual modifications in a face recognition task. Neuroreport, 2001; 12, 1209-1216.
Hagoort P, Indefrey P, Brown C, et al. The neural circuitry involved in the reading of German words and pseudowords: A PET study. J Cogn Neurosci, 1999, 11: 383-398.
Halgren, E., Dale, A.M., Sereno, M.I., Tootell, R.B.H., Marinkovic, K. & Rosen, B. Location of human face-selective cortex with respect to retinotopic areas. Human Brain Mapping, 1999; 7, 29-37.
Halgren E, Raij T, Marinkovic K, Jousmaki V, Hari R. Cognitive response profile of the human fusiform face area as determined by MEG. Cereb Cortex 2000; 10: 69-81. Halit H, de Haan M, Johnson MH. Modulation of event-related potentials by prototypical and atypical faces. NeuroReport 2000; 11: 1871-1875.
Hardyck,C.,O.J.L.Tzeng,and W.S.-Y.Wang. Ceretral lateralization effects in visual half-field experiments. Nature, 1977. 269:705-707.
HattaThe effects of Kanji attributs of visual field diferences: Examination with lexical desicion, naming and sementic classification tasks. Neuropsychologia, 1992; 4, 361-371.
Hatta, T. Tachistoscopic recognition of Kana and Kanji. Neuropsychologia, 1977; 15, 685-688.
Haxby J V, Gobbini M I, Furey M L, Ishai A, Schouten J L, Pletrini P. Distributed and overlapping representations of faces and objects in ventral temporal cortex. Science, 2001, 2935539: 2425-2430.
Haxby J V, Hoffman E A, Gobbini M I. Human Neural Systems for Face Recognition and Social Communication. Biology Psychiatry, 2002, 51: 59-67.
Haxby, J.V., Hoffman, E.A. & Gobbini, M.I. The distributed human neural system for face perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2000; 4, 223-233.
Haxby, J.V., Ungerleider, L.G., Clark, V.P., Schouten, J.L., Hoffman, E.A. & Martin, A. The effect of face inversion on activity in human neural systems for face and object perception. Neuron, 1999; 22, 189-199.
Hay, D. C. & Young, A. W. The human face. In A. W. Ellis Ed.; Normality and Pathology in Cognitive Function. London: Academic Press. 1982.
Hayes, T., Morrone, M. C. & Burr, D.C. Recognition of positive and negative bandpass-filtered images. Perception, 1986; 15, 595-602.
Hillger, L.A. & Koenig, O. Separable Mechanisms in face processing: evidence from hemispheric specialization. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1991; 3, 42-58.
Hoffman, E.A. & Haxby, J.V. Distinct representations of eye gaze and identity in the distributed human neural system for face perception. Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 80-84.
Holeomb PJ.Semantic priming and stimulus degradation:implication for the role of the N 400 in language processing.Psychophysiol0gy,1993,301:47-61.
Holcomb P J, Anderson J E. Cross-modal semantic priming: A time-course analysis using event-related potentials. Lang. Cogn. Processes, 1993, 8: 379-411.
Huang J T, WangM Y. From unit to gestalt: perceptual dynamics in recognizing Chinese characters A. Language processing in Chinese, 1992.
Hung, D.L. and Tzeng O.J.L. Orthographic variation and visual information processing.Psychology Bulletin 1981; 90:377-414.
Hubeber M,Shoham D,Grinvald A et al. Spatial relationship among three columar systems in cat area 17.Journal of Neuroscience,1997,17:9270-9284.
Illes J, FrancisWS, Desmond JE, et al. Convergent cortical representation of semantic p rocessing in bilinguals. Brain Lang, 1999, 70: 347-363.
Ishai A,Ungerleider L G,Martin A, Schouten, J.L. & Haxby, J.V. Distributed representation of objects in the human ventral visual pathway. Proceedings Of The National Academy of Sciences of The United States of America, 1999, 96: 9379-9384.
Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. Effects of repetition learning on upright, inverted, and contrast-reversed face processing using ERPs. Neuroimage 2004; 21: 1518-1532.
Jeffreys, D.A. A face-responsive potential recorded from the human scalp. Experimental Brain Research, 1989; 78, 193-202.
Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. Inversion and contrast polarity reversal affect both encoding and recognition processes of unfamiliar faces: a repetition study using ERPs. NeuroImage 2002; 15: 353-372.
Jeffreys, D.A. The influence of stimulus orientation on the vertex positive scalp potential evoked by faces. Experimental Brain Research, 1993; 96, 163-172.
Jemel, B., George, N., Chaby, L., Fiori, N. & Renault, B. Differential processing of part-to-whole and part-to-part face priming: an ERP study. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 1069-1075.
Kagan, J. & Klein, R. E. Cross-cultural perspectives on early development. American Psychologist, 1973; 28, 947-961.
Kanwisher N. Domain specificity in face perception. Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 759-763.
Kanwisher, N., Downing, P., Epstein, R., &Kourtzi, Z. Functional Neuroimaging of Human Visual Recognition. In R. Cabeza & A. Kingstone (Eds); The Handbook on Functional Neuroimaging. pg 109-152.Cambridge: MIT press. 2001.
Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun M M. The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 1997, 1711: 4302-4311.
Kanwisher, N., Tong, F. & Nakayama, K. The effect of face inversion on the human fusiform face area. Cognition, 1998; 68, B1-B11.
Keenan J P, McCutcheon B, Freund S. Left hand advantage in a self-face recognition task. Neuropsychologia, 1999, 37: 1421-1425.
Keenan JP, Nelson A, O’Connor M et al. Self-recognition and the right hemisphere. Nature, 2001, 409: 305.
Kemp, R., McManus, C. & Pigott, T. Sensitivity to the displacement of facial features in negative and inverted images. Perception, 1990; 19, 531-543.
Tanaka, J.W. & Sengco, J.A. Features and their configuration in face recognition. Memory and Cognition, 1997; 25, 583-592.
Kleiner, K. A. Amplitude and phase spectra as indices of infants’ pattern preferences. Infant Behavior and Development, 1987; 10, 49-59.
Kleiner, K. A. & Banks, M. S. Stimulus energy does not account for 2-month-olds’ face preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1987; 13, 594-600.
Koenig, O. Separable Mechanisms in face processing: evidence from hemispheric specialization. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1991; 3, 42-58.
Kohler, W. Dynamics in Psychology. New York: Liveright. 1940.
Kolb, B., Milner, B. & Taylor, L. Perception of faces by patients with localized corrical excisions. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1983; 37, 8-18.
Kuo WJ, Yeh TC, Duann JR, et al. A left-lateralized network for reading Chinese words: a 3T fMR I study. Neuroreport, 2001, 12: 3997-4001.
Kutas M,Hillyard SA.An electrophysiological probe of incidental semantic associationJ.J Cngn Neurosci,1989,l1:38- 49.
Kutas M,Hillyard SA.Reading senseless sentences:brain Potential reflect semantic incongruity.Science,1980,207:203-205.
Kutas M, McCarthy G, Donchin E. Augmenting mental chronomentry: the P300 as a measure of stimulus eveluation time. Science, 1977;197:792-795.。
Kutas M,Neville HJ,Holcomb PJ.A preliminarv comparison of the N400 respo nse to semantic anomalies during reading,listening and signing.Electroencephalogr Clin Neutophysiol,1987,39:325-330.
Kutas, M., and Van Petten, C.K. Psycholinguistics electrified event-related brain potential investigation. Handbook of Psycholinguistics, Edited by Morton Ana, Gernsbachev, Academic Press.INC. 1994.
Kutas M,Van Petten C,Besson M Event-related potentials asymmtries during the reading sentences.Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol,1988,69:218-223.
Leder, H, & Bruce, V. Local and relational aspects of face distinctiveness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 1998; 51, 449-473.
Leder, H. & Bruce, V. When inverted faces are recognized: The role of configural information in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 2000; 53, 513-536.
Leder H, Candrian G, Huber O. & Bruce, V. Configural features in the context of upright and inverted faces. Perception, 2001; 30, 73-83.
Leehey, S., Carey, S., Diamond, R. & Cahn, A. Upright and inverted faces: The right hemisphere knows the difference. Cortex, 1978; 14-411-419.
Levine, S. C., Banich, M.T. & Koch-Weser, M.P. Face recognition: A general or specific right hemisphere capacity? Brain and Cognition. 1988; 8(3):303-25.
Levy, I., Hasson, U., Avidan, G., Hendler, T., Malach, R. Center-periphery organization of human object areas. Nature Neuroscience, 2001; 4, 533-539.
Light, L. L., Kayra-Start, F. & Hollander, S. Recognition memory for typical and unusual faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1979; 5, 218-223.
Linkenkaer-Hansen, K., Palva, J.M., Sams, M., Hietanen, J.K., Aronen H.J & Ilmoniemi, R.J. Face-selective processing in human extrastriate cortex around 120 ms after stimulus onset revealed by magneto- and electroencephalography. Neuroscience letters, 1998; 253, 147-150.
Liu J, Higuchi M, Marantz A. & Kanwisher N. The selectivity of the occipitotemporal M170 for faces. Neuroreport, 2000; 11, 337-341.
Logothetis, N.K, Pauls, J., Augath, M., Trinath, T. & Oeltermann, A. Neurophysiological investigation of the basis of the fMRI signal. Nature, 2001; 412, 150-157.
Marinkovic K, Trebon P, Chauvel P et al. Localized face-processing by the human prefrontal cortex: Face-selective intracerebral potentials and post-lesion deficits. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17: 187-199.
Maruyama, K. & Endo, M. The effect of face orientation upon apparent direction of gaze. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1983; 42,126-138.
Maruyama, K. & Endo, M. Illusory face dislocation effect and configural integration in the inverted face. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1984; 43, 150-160.
Matthews PM, Adcock J, Chen Y, et al. Towards understanding language organisation in the brain using fMR I. Hum Brain Mapp, 2003, 18: 239-247.
Maurer D, Grand R L, Mondloch C J. The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2002, 66: 255-260.
McCarthy, G., Puce, A., Belger, A. & Allison, T. Electrophysiological studies of human face perception: response properties of face-specific potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 1999; 9, 431-444.
McCarthy G, Puce A, Gore J C Allison, T.. Face-specific processing in the human fusiform gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1997, 9: 605-610.
McCallum W C, Farmer S F, Pocick P V. The effects of physical and semantic incogruities on auditory event-related potentials. Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol., 1984, 59: 477-488.
McCandliss, B.D., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003, 7(7): 293-299
McClelland, J. L. & Rumelhart, D. E. Distributed memory and the representation of general and specific information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1985; 114, 159-188.
McGurk, H. The role of object orientation in infant perception. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1970; 9, 363-373.
McNeil J, Warrington E. Prosopagnosia: a face-specific disorder. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1993, 46A: 1-10.
Mesulam M M.From sensation to cognition.Brain, 1998, 121:1013-1052.
Miyamoto T,Katayama J,Koyama T.ERPs,semantic Processing and ageJ.Int J Psychophysiol,1998,29(1):43-51.
Milivojevic B, Clapp WC, Johnson BW, Corballis MC. Turn that frown upside down: ERP effects of thatcherization of misoriented faces. Psychophysiology 2003; 40: 967– 978.
Moscovitch, M. Behrmann, M. & Winocur, G. What is special about face recognition ? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1997; 9, 555-604.
Mouchetant RY, Giard MH, Bentin S, Aguera PE, Pernier J. Neurophysiological correlates of face gender processing in humans. Eur J Neurosci 2000; 12: 303-310.
Munte, T.F., Brack, M., Grootheer, O., Wieringa, B.M., Matzke, M., Johannes, S. Brain potentials reveal the timing of face identity and expression judgments. Neuroscience Research, 1998; 30, 25-34.
Murray, J.E., Yong, E. & Rhodes, G. Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces. Psychological. Science, 2000; 11, 492-496.
Nachson, I. On the modularity of face recognition: the riddle of domain specificity. Journal of Clinical and experimental Neuropsychology, 1995; 17, 256-275.
Niznikiewicz M, Squires N K. Phonological processing and the role of strategy in silent reading: Behavioral and electrophysological evidence. Brain Lang., 1996; 52: 342-364.
Olichney JM , Van-Petten C , Paller KA word repetition in amnesia. Electrophysiologocal measure of impaired and spared memoryJ.Brain,2000,123(Pt 9):1948-1963.
Parks, T.E., Letter to the editor. Perception, 1983; 12, 88.
Parks, T. E., Coss, R.G. & Coss, C. S. Thatcher and the Cheshire cat: Context and the processing of facial features. Perception, 1985; 14:747-754.
Parr, L.A., Dove, T. & Hopkins, W.D. Why faces may be special: Evidence of the inversion effect in chimpanzees. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1998; 10:615-622.
Paulesu E, McCrory E, Fazio F, et al. A cultural effect on brain function. Nat Neurosci, 2000, 3: 91-96.
Penfield, W. and L.Roberts. Speech and Brain Mechanisms. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1959.
Perrett, D.I., Mistlin, A.J., Chitty, A.J., Smith, P.A.J., Potter, D.D., Broennimann, R. & Harries, M. Specialized face processing and hemispheric asymmetry in man and monkey: evidence from single unit and reaction times studies. Behavioral Brain Research, 1988; 29, 245-258.
Perrett, D.I., Oram, M.W. & Ashbridge, E. Evidence accumulation in cell populations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations. Cognition, 1998; 67, 111-145.
Phelps, M.T. & Roberts, W.A. Memory for pictures of upright and inverted primate faces in humans squirrel-monkeys, and pigeons. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 1994; 108, 114-125.
Phillips M L, Young A W, Senior C et al. A specific neural substrate for perceiving facial expressions of disgust. Nature, 1997, 389: 495-498.
83. Phillips, R. J. Some exploratory experiments on memory for photographs of faces. Acta Psychologica, 1979; 43, 39-56.
84.Phillips, R. J. & Rawles, R. E. Recognition of upright and inverted faces: A correlational study. Perception, 1979; 8,577-583.
Puce A,Allison T,Gore JC et al.Face sensitive regions in human extrastiate cortex studied by functional MRI.Journal of Neurophysiology,1995,74:1192-1199.
Puce A, Allison T,McCarthy G.Electrophysiological studies of human face perception.Ⅲ:Effects of top-down processing on face-specific potentials.Cerebral Cortex,1999, 9:445-458.
Pulvermuller F. Words in the brain’s language. Behav Brain Sci, 1999, 22: 253-336.
Rakover, S.S. & Teucher, B. Facial inversion effects: Parts and whole relationship. Perception and psychophysics, 1997; 59: 752-761.
85. Rapacaynski, W. & Ehrlichman, H. Opposite visual hemifield superiorities in face recognition as a function of cognitive style. Neuropsychologia, 1979; 17, 645-652.
Rebai, M., Poiroux, S., Bernard, C. & Lalonde, R. Event-related potentials for category-specific information during passive viewing of faces and objects. International Journal of Neuroscience, 2001; 106, 209-226. 86. Rhodes, G. Lateralized processes in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 1985; 76, 249-271.
Rhodes, G., Brennan, S. & Carey, S. Recognition and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 1987; 19, 473-497.
Riesenhuber, M. & Poggio, T. Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 1999; 2, 1019-1025.
Rock, I. Orientation and Form. New York: Academic Press. 1973;
Rock, I. The perception of disoriented figures. Scientific American, 1974; 230, 78-85.
Rolls, E.T. Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying face processing within and beyond the temporal cortical visual areas.Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond B,
1992; 335, 11-21.
Rossion, B., Delvenne, J.F., Debatisse, D., Goffaux, V., Bruyer, R., Crommelinck, M. & Guérit, J.-M. Spatio-temporal localization of the face inversion effect: an event-related potentials study. Biological Psychology, 1999a; 50, 173-189.
Rossion, B., Campanella, S., Gomez, C., Delinte, A., Debatisse, D., Liard, L., Dubois, S., Bruyer, R., Crommelinck, M. & Guérit, J. M. Task Modulation of Brain Activity Related to Familiar and Unfamiliar Face Processing: an ERP Study. Clinical Neurophysiology, 1999b; 110, 449-462.
Rossion, B., Gauthier, I., Tarr, M.J., Despland, P.A., Bruyer, R., Linotte, S. & Crommelinck, M. The N170 occipito-temporal component is enhanced and delayed to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face-specific processes in the human brain. 2000a; Neuroreport, 11, 69-74.
Rossion, B., Dricot, L., De Volder, A., Bodart, J.-M., Crommelinck, M., de Gelder, B. & Zoontjes, R. Hemispheric asymmetries for whole-based and parts-based face processing in the human fusiform gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2000b; 12, 793-802.
Rossion B. and Gauthier I. How does the brain process upright and inverted faces? Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2002; 1(1):63-75.
Rossion B , Gauthier I , Tarr MJ , et al. The N170 occipito -temporal component is delayed and enhanced to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face - specific processes in the human brain. Cognitive Neuroscience, 2002, 111(117): 69-74.
Ruchkin DS, Johnson R, Grafman J, Canoune H, Ritter W. Multiple visuospatial working memory buffers: Evidence from spatiotemporal patterns of brain activity. Neuropsychologia, 1997; 35:195-209.
Rugg M D, Doyle M C, Wells T. Word and nonword repetition within- and across-modality: An event-related potential study. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 1995, 7: 209-227.
Ruyer, R., Galvez, C. & Prairial, C. Effect of disorientation on visual analysis, familiarity decision and semantic decision on faces. British Journal of Psychology, 1993; 84, 433-441.
Sagiv, N. & Bentin, S. Structural encoding of human and schematic faces: holistic and part-based processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2001; 13(7):937-51.
Scapinello, K.F. & Yarmey, A. D. The role of familiarity and orientation in immediate and delayed recognition of pictorial stimuli. Psychonomic Science, 1970; 21, 329-330.
Schultz, R. T., Gauthier, I., Klin, A., Fulbright, R.K., Anderson, A.W., Volkmar, F., Skudlarski, P., Lacadie, C., Cohen, D.J., & Gore, J.C. Abnormal ventral temporal cortical activity during face discrimination among individuals with autism and Asperger syndrome. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 2000; 57: 331-40.
Schyns P G, Oliva A. Dr. Angry and Mr. Smile: when categorization flexibly modifies the perception of faces in rapid visual presentations. Cognition, 1999, 69: 243-265.
Schyns, P.G. & Rodet, L. Categorization creates functional features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning and Memory, 1997; 23, 681-696.
Searcy, J.H. & Bartlett, J.C. Inversion and processing of component and spatialrelational information in faces. Journal of experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1996; 22, 904-915.
Seeck, M, Michel, CM, Mainwaring, N, Cosgrove, R, Blume, H, Ives, J, Landis, T, Schomer, DL. Evidence for rapid face recognition from human scalp and intracranial electrodes. Neuroreport, 1997; 8, 2749-54.
Seidenberg, M. S. The time course of phonological code activation in two writing system. Cognition, 1985; 19(1):1-30.
Seidenberg, M. S., McCleland, J. L. A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 1989; 96(4):523-68.
Sergent, J. An investigation into component and configural processes underlying face perception. British Journal of Psychology, 1984; 75, 221-242.
Sergent, J. Influence of task and input factors on hemispheric involvement in face processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1985; 10, 554-572.
Sergent, J. Microgenesis of face perception. In H.D. Ellis, M. A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young Eds; Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Sergent J, Ohta S, Macdonald. Functional neuroanatomy of face and object processing.Brain, A positron emission tomography study. 1992; 115:15-36.
Shepard, R. N. & Metzler, J. Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 1971; 171:701-703.
Shepherd, J. Social factors in face recognition. In G. Davies, H. Ellis & J. Shepherd (Eds), Perceiving and Remembering Faces. London: Academic Press. 1981.
Shepherd, J. W. & Deregowski, J. B. Races and faces a comparison of the responses of Africans and Europeans to faces of the same and different races. British Journal of Social Psychology, 1981; 20, 125-133.
Shulman GL, Corbetta M, Buckner RL, Raichle ME, Fiez JA, Miezin FM, et al. Top-down modulation of early sensory cortex. Cereb Cortex, 1997; 7: 193-206.
Simion, F., Macchi Cassia, V., Turati, C & Valenza, E. The origins of face perception: Specific vs. non-specific mechanisms. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN, April. 2001.
Singer W. & Gray, C.M. Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 1995; 18, 555-586.
Small, M. Hemisphere differences in the evoked potedtial to face stimuli. In H. D. Ellis, M. A. Jeeves, I. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Sorce, J. F. & Campos, J. J. The role of expression in the recognition of a face. American Journal of Psychology, 1974; 87, 71-82.
Streit M, Wolwer W, Brinkmeyer J. Electrophysiological correlates of emotional and structural face processing in humans. Neuroscience Letters, 2002; 278:13- 16.
Stuss D T, Picton T W, Cerri A M. Searching for the names of pictures: An event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 1986; 23: 215-223.
Sugase Y, Yamane S, Ueno S, Kawano K. Global and fine information coded by single neurons in the temporal visual cortex. Nature, 1999; 400: 869-873.
Swindale N S.Cortical organization: Modules, polymaps and mosaics. Current biology, 1998; 8:R270-R273.
Takane, Y. & Sergent, J. Multidimensional scaling models for reaction times and same-different judgments. Psychometrika, 1983; 48, 393-423.
Taft M. Reading and the mental lexicon M. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Assccs, 1991.
Taft M, Zhu X. Submorphemic processing in reading Chinese. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1994; 23 (3): 761-775.
Tallon-Baudry C, Bertrand O. Oscillatory gamma activity in humans and its role in object representation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1999; 3, 151-162.
Taylor MJ. Non-spatial attentional effects on P1. Clin Neurophysiol 2002; 113: 1903–1908.
Taylor MJ, Edmonds GE, McCarthy G, Allison T. Eyes first! Eye processing develops before face processing in children. NeuroReport 2001; 12: 1671–1676.
Tan LH, Liu HL, Perfetti CA, et al. The neural system underlying Chinese logograph reading. Neuroimage, 2001, 13: 836-846.
Tan LH, Sp inks JA, Feng CM, et al. Neural systems of second language reading are shaped by native language. Hum Brain Mapp, 2003, 18: 158-166.
Tan LH, Sp inks JA, Gao JH, et al. Brain activation in the p rocessing of Chinese characters and words: a functional MRI study. Hum BrainMapp, 2000, 10: 16-27.
Tan LH, Sp inks JA, Gao JH, et al. Brain activation in the processing of Chinese characters and words: a functionalMRI study. Hum Brain Mapp, 2000, 10: 16-27.
Tanaka, J.W. & Curran, T. A neural basis for expert object recognition. Psychological Science, 2001; 12, 43-47.
Tanaka, J.W. & Farah, M.J. Parts and wholes in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1993; 46A, 225-245.
Tanaka, J.W. & Gauthier, I. Expertise in object and face recognition. In Goldstone, R.L., Schyns, P.G. & Medin, D.L. (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol.36, pp.83-125. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. 1997.
Tanaka, J.W. Luu, P., Weisbrod, M. & Kiefer, M. Tracking the time course of object categorization using event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 829-835.
Tanaka, J.W. & Taylor, M. Object categories and expertise: Is the basic level in the eye of the beholder? Cognitive Psychology, 1991; 23, 457-482.
Tarr, M.J & Gauthier, I. FFA: a flexible fusiform area for subordinate-level visual processing automatized by expertise. Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 764-769.
Taylor, M.J., Itier, R.J., Allison, T. & Edmonds, G. Direction of gaze effects on early face processing: eyes-only versus full faces. Cognitive Brain Research, 2001; 10(3):333-340.
Taylor, M.J., McCarthy, G., Saliba, E. & Degiovanni, E. ERP evidence of developmental changes in processing of faces, Clinical Neurophysiology, 1999; 110, 910-915.
Thompson, P. Margaret Thatcher, A new illusion. Perception, 1980; 9, 483-484.
Toyama, J. S. The effect of orientation on the recognition of faces: A reply to Yin. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, Canada. 1975.
Trejo L J, Ryan-Jones D L, Kramer A F. Attentional modulation of the mismatch negativity elicited by frequency differences between binaurally presented tone bursts. Psychophysiology, 1995, 32: 319-328.
Valentine, T. Encoding processes in face recognition. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Nottingham. 1986.
Valentine, T. A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1991; 43A2; 161-204.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. What’s Up? The Margaret Thatcher illusion revisited. Perception 1985; 14, 515-516.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. The effect of race, inversion and encoding activity upon face recognition. Acta Psychologica, 1986a; 61, 259-273.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. Recognizing familiar faces: The role of distinctiveness and familiarity. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1986b; 40, 300-305.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. The effects of distinctiveness in recognising and classifying faces. Perception, 1986; 15, 525-535.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. Mental rotation of faces. Memory and Cognition .1988; 16(6):556-66.
Valenza, E., Simion, F., Mucchi Cassia, V. & Umilta, C. Face preference at birth. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Perception and Performance, 1996; 22: 892-903.
Vignal J P, Chauvel P, Halgren E. Localized face-processing by the human prefrontal cortex: Stimulation-evoked hallucinations of faces. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17: 281-291.
Walter H, Vetter S, Grothe J, Wunderlich A, Hahn S, Spitzer M. The neural correlates of driving. Neuroreport, 2001; 12:1763-1767.
Watson, J. S. Perception of object orientation in infants. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1966; 12, 73-94.
Zhou,X. ,&Marslen-Wilson ,W. Direct visual access is the only way to access the Chinese mental lexicon. In Proceeding of the 18th Annual Conference of Cognitive Science Society, 1996.
Wernicke, C.1874.Der aphasische Symptomencomplex.Eine psychologische Studie auf Anatomischer Basis.Breslau:Kohn und Weigert.The symptom complex of aphasia.A psychological study of an anatomical basis. In R.S.Cohen and M.W.Wartofsky,eds.,1966/1968,Boston Studies in the
Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the Boston Colloquium for the Philosophy of Science, Volume IV.Dordrecht-Holland: D.Reidel.
Xu, Y., Liu, J., & Kanwisher, N. The M170 is selective for faces, not for expertise. Neuropsychologia, 2005; 43: 588–597.
Yarmey, A. D. Recognition memory for familiar ‘public’ faces: Effects of orientation and delay. Psychonomic Science, 1971; 24: 286-288.
Yin, R. K. Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969; 81, 141-145.
Yin, R. K. Face recognition: A dissociable ability? Neuropsychologia, 1970a; 23, 395-402.
Yin, R. K. Face recognition: A special process? Unpublished PHD thesis, MIT. 1970b.
Yin, R. K. Face perception: A review of experiments with infants, normal adults, and brain-injured persons. In R Held, H. W. Leibowitz & H. L. Teuber (Eds), Handbook of Sensory Physiology, vol, 8 Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 1978.
Young, A. W. Right hemisphere superiority for recognizing the internal and external features of famous faces. British Journal of Psychology, 1984; 75, 161-169.
Young, A. W. Face recognition. In H. Beloff & A Colman (Eds), Psychology Survey, 6 Leicester: BPS. 1987.
Young, A. W. & Bion, P.J. Absence of any developmental trend in right hemisphere superiority for face receognition. Cortex, 1980; 16: 213-221.
Young, A. W. & Bion, P. J. Accuracy of naming laterally presented known faces by children and adults. Cortex, 1981; 17, 97-106.
Young, A. W., Hellawell, D. & Hay, D. C. Configurational information in face perception. Perception, 1987; 16: 747-759.
Young A W, Newcombe F, de Hann E H F et al. Face perception after brain injury: Selective impairments affecting identity and expression. Brain, 1993, 116: 941-959.
陈传锋,黄希庭. 结构对称性汉字认知:研究与应用. 北京:新华出版社, 2004.
陈传锋,黄希庭.结构对称性汉字视觉识别特定的实验研究.心理学报,1999;312: 154-161.
陈 璇 . 中 西 文 N400 的 研 究 现 状 简 述 1 临 床 神 经 电 生 理 学 杂 志 ,2004a;131:53-55.
陈 璇 . 中 西 文 N400 的 研 究 现 状 简 述 2 临 床 神 经 电 生 理 学 杂 志 ,2004b;132:118-120.
冯晓源, 刘含秋. 功能磁共振成像在中国的研究现状. 中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2004; 10: 292-298.
高定国,郭可教.对汉字认知与大脑两半球关系研究的一些回顾.心理科学,1993, 16(6):363-368.
管益杰 方富熹. 我国汉字识别研究的新进展 心理学动态 2000;8(2):1-6.
管益杰,李燕芳,宋 艳. 汉字字形加工的关键特征模型 山东师范大学学报, 2006;512:126-129.
梁丹丹 中国神经语言学的回顾与前瞻.当代语言学,2004;62:139-153.
李勇, 赵高年, 谢鹏. 功能磁共振成像与语言学研究. 实用神经疾病杂志, 2004;7: 36-37.
楼良岗,范思陆.事件相关电位ERPs反映汉字与其心理模板的失匹配.心理学报,1989;213:321-327.
罗耀嘉主编. 认知神经科学教程. 北京:北京大学出版社,2006.130-131.
罗跃嘉,魏景汉.汉字识别的跨感觉通路ERP注意成分研究.中国科学,1998;6:508-515.
罗跃嘉, 魏景汉. 正常青年人汉字语义识别的 ERP 特征性成分, 中国科学院心理研究所年报, 1997; 42-43.
罗跃嘉,魏景汉.中西文的事件相关电位N400研究现状.心理学动态,1998;63; 1-5.
马林, 唐一潭, 王岩, 等. 汉字处理相关大脑皮层区的功能磁共振成像. 中华放射学杂志, 2002; 36: 198-201.
彭聃龄. 汉语认知研究. 济南:山东教育出版社,1997.
彭聃龄、王春茂. 汉字识别的基本单元-来自笔画数效应和部件数效应的研究,心理学报,(1997)29(1):7-12.
沈 模 卫 , 朱 祖 祥 . 部 件 启 动 对 合 体 汉 字 识 别 的 影 响 . 心 理 科 学 , 1997;203:206-211.
沈模卫,朱祖祥. 整体汉字字形识别过程探索. 应用心理学, 1995, 12: 43-48.
孙相如、董瑞国、高素荣.汉字形音义分类的事件相关脑电位. 第六届中国语文--认知科学国际研讨会论文,台北. 1993.
王乃怡两耳分听歌曲时大脑两半球功能的非对称性,心理学报,1984;1,75-78.
汪亚珉 傅小兰 面部表情识别与面孔身份识别的独立加工与交互作用机制 心里科学进展,2005;13(4):497-516.
魏景汉, 罗跃嘉主编. 认知事件相关脑电位教程. 经济日报出版社. 2002.
魏景汉, 匡培梓, 张东松等. 全视野汉字词义联想的ERP特征与汉字认识的ERP甄别. 心理学报, 1995; 274: 413-419.
伍建林, 何立岩, 宋清伟, 等. 功能磁共振成像在人脑数字及汉字认知加工中的初步研究. 中国临床康复, 2003; 7: 2690-2691.
肖 崇 好 , 黄 希 庭 . 汉 字 独 体 字 识 别 中 的 框 架 结 构 效 应 . 心 理 科学,1998;213:221-225.
徐岩 张亚旭 周晓林 面孔加工的认知神经科学研究:回顾与展望 心理科学进展,2003;11(1):35-43.
严建雯,孙善麟,汉字识别的加工模型 宁波大学学报,2005,18 3:329-332.
喻柏林,曹河圻等.汉字形码和音码的整体性对部件识别的影响.心理学报,1990;223: 232-239.
喻柏林,曹河圻.汉字识别中的笔画数效应新探--兼论字频效应.心理学报,1992;242:120-126.
喻柏林,冯玲等.汉字的视知觉-知觉任务效应和汉字的属性效应.心理学,1990;222:141-147.
张侃, 冯玲, 陈楚晖, 等. 语言与音乐刺激下脑功能活动的MR功能成像研究. 中华放射学杂志, 1999;33: 311-315.
张明岛, 陈兴时等编著. 脑诱发电位学. 上海科技教育出版社. 1995.
张娜,翁旭初,罗本燕 汉字阅读加工的功能磁共振研究进展 国际脑血管病杂志,2006;143:216-218.
张伟伟, 陈玉翠, 沈政. 从面孔模块到马赛克——视觉特异加工的脑机制. 心理学报, 2001;332: 182-188.
张武田,冯玲.关于汉字识别加工单位的研究.心理学报,1992,244:379-385
周晓林. 语义激活中语音的有限作用.济南:山东教育出版社,1997.
朱晓平.汉语字词识别的现状.心理科学,1992;1:40-45.
Adolphs R, Tranel, D, Damasio, H et al. Impaired recognition of emotion in facial expression following bilateral damage to the human amygdala. Nature, 1994, 372: 669-672.
Aguirre, G.K., Singh, R. & D’Esposito, M.. Stimulus inversion and the responses of face and object-sensitive cortical areas. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 189-194.
Aguirre, G.K., Zarahn, E. & D'Esposito, M. An area within human ventral cortex sensitive to "building" stimuli: Evidence and implications. Neuron, 1998; 21, 373-383.
Allison T, McCarthy G, Nobre A et al.Human extrastriate visual cortex and the perception of faces,words,numbers,and colors. Cerebral Cortex, 1994, 5:544-554.
Allison, T., Puce, A., Spencer, D.D. & McCarthy, G. Electrophysiological studies of human face perception: potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex by face and nonface stimuli. Cerebral Cortex, 1999; 9, 415-430.
Andrews T J, Ewbank M P. Distinct representations for facial identity and changeable aspects of faces in the human temporal lobe. NeuroImage, 2004, 23: 905-913.
Banich, M.T. and Belger, A. Interhemispheric interaction: How do the hemispheres divide and conquer a task. Cortex 1990; 26, 79-94.
Bartlett, J.C. & Searcy, J. Inversion and configuration of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 1993; 25, 281-316.
B?uml, K.H. Upright versus upside-down faces: How interface attractiveness varies with orientation. Perception and Psychophysics, 1994; 56(2): 163–172.
B?uml, K.H., Schnelzer, M., & Zimmer, A. The influence of inversion on the judgment of facial and non-facial attributes. Acta Psychologica, 1997; 96(1):27–42.
Bentin, S., Allison, T., Puce, A., Perez, A. & McCarthy, G. Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1996; 8, 551-565.
Bentin, S. & Deouell, L. Structural encoding and identification in face processing: ERP evidence for separate mechanisms. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000; 17, 35-54.
Bentin, S., Deouell, L.Y. & Soroker, N. Selective visual streaming in face recognition: evidence from developmental prosopagnosia. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 823-827.
Bentin S, Kutas M, Hillyard S A. Electrophysiological evidence for task effects on semantic priming in auditory word processing. Psychophysiology, 1993, 30: 161-169.
Bentin S, Kutas M, Hillyard S A. Semantic processing and memory for attended and unattended words in dichotic listening: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. J. Exp. Psychol.: Human Perception and Performance. 1995,24: 54-67.
Biederman I. Higher-level vision. Visual cognition and action: an invitation to cognitive science. CambridgeMA: MIT Press, 1990.
Bodamer, J.. Die-Prosop-agnosie. Arch. Psychiatr. Nervenkrankh., 1947; 179, 6-54.English translation by par Ellis, H.D. & Florence, M. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 1990; 7, 81-105.
Bosbach, S, Knoblich, G.., Reed, C.L., Cole, J., & Prinz, W. Body inversion effect without body sense: Insights from deafferentation. Neuropsychologia, 2006;44, 2950-2958.
Botzel K,Schulze S,Stodieck SRG.Scalp topography and analysis of intracranial sources of face-evoked potentials. Experimental Brain Research,l995; 104(1):134—143.
Bradshaw, J.L., Taylor, M.J., Patterson, K. & Neettleton, N.C. Upright and inverted faces, and housefronts, in two visual fields: A right and a left hemisphere contribution. Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology, 1980; 2, 245-257.
Bradshaw, J.L. & Wallace, G. Models for the processing and identification of faces. Perception and Psychophysics, 1971; 9, 443-448.
Braeutigam, S., Bailey, A.J., Swithenby, S.J. Task-dependent early latency (30-60ms) visual processing of human faces and other objects. Neuroreport, 2001 12, 1531-1536.
Bruce, V. Changing faces: Visual and non-visual coding processes in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 1982; 73, 105-116.
Bruce, V. & Green, P. Visual Perception: Physiology, Psychology and Ecology. London: Erlbaum. 1985.
Bruce V, Young A. Understanding face recognition. Britain Journal of Psychology, 1986, 77: 305-327
26. Bruyer, R. Cerebral and behavioural asymmetries in the processing of ‘unusual’ faces: A revies. In H.D. Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986a.
Bruyer, R. The Neuropsycbology of Face Perception and Facial Expression. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum. 1986b.
Bruyer, R., Laterre, C., Seron, X., Feyereisen, P. Stryptien, E., Pierrard, E. & Rectem, D. A case of prosopagnosia with some preserved covert remembrance of familiar faces. Brain and Cognition, 1983; 2, 257-284.
Bruyer, R. & Velge, V. Lesions Cérébrale unilateral et trouble de la perception des visages:Specificité du deficit? Acta Neurological Belgica, 1981; 81, 321-332.
Bukach, C.M., Gauthier, I., & Tarr M. J. Beyond faces and modularity: the power of an expertise framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2006,10(4):159-166
Cabeza R, Kingstone A. Handbook of Functional Neuroimaging of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1999.
Calder A J, Keane J, Cole J et al. Facial expression recognition by people with M?bius syndrome. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17: 73-87.
Calis, G. & Mens, L. Primary stages in single-glance face recognition: Expression and identity. In H.D.Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F.Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing.Dordrecht:Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Calvert G, Bullmore E T, Brammer M J et al. Activation of auditory cortex during silent lip-reading. Science, 1997, 276: 593-596.
Campanella, S., Hanoteau, C., Depy, D., Rossion, B., Bruyer, R., Crommelinck, M. & Guerit, J.M. Right N170 modulation in a face discrimination task: An account for categorical perception of familiar faces. Psychophysiology, 2000; 37, 796-806.
Carey, S. The development of face perception. In G.Davies, H.Ellis & J.Shepherd (Eds), Perceiving and Remembering Faces. London:Academic Press. 1981.
Carey, S.& Diamond, R. From piecemeal to configurational representation of faces. Science, 1977; 195, 312-314.
Carey, S. Diamond, R. & Woods, B. The development of face recognition a maturational component? Developmental Psychology, 1980; 16, 257-269.
Cauquil, A.S., Edmonds, G.E. & Taylor, M.J. Is the face-sensitive N170 the only ERP not affected by selective attention? Neuroreport, 2000; 11 (10): 2167-2171.
Chance, J.E., Turner, A. L. & Golbstein, A. G. Development of face recognition for own and other-race faces. Journal of Psychology, 1982; 112: 29-37.
Chao L L, Haxby J V, Martin A. Attribute-based neural substrates in temporal cortex for perceiving and knowing objects. Nature Neuroscience, 1999; 2: 913-919.
CheeMW, Cap lan D, Soon CS, et al. Processing of visually p resented sentences inMandarin and English studied with fMR I. Neuron, 1999, 23: 127-137.
Chee MW, Tan EW, Thiel T. Mandarin and English single word processing studied with functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci, 1999; 19: 3050-3056.
Chen, Y., Fu, S., Iversen, S.D., Smith, S.M., & Matthews, P.M. Testing for dual brain processing routes in reading: A direct contrast of Chinese character and Pinyin reading using fMRI. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2002;14(7): 1088–1098.
Chen Ying, Peng Daling. A connectionistmodel of Chinese character recognition and naming. Taipei: Advance in the study of Chinese language processing.1994.
Clark VP, Hillyard SA. Spatial selective attention affects early extrastriate components of the visual evoked potential. J Cogn Neurosci 1996; 8: 387-402.
Collishaw, S.M & Hole, J.C. Featural and configurational processes in the recognition of faces of different familiarity. Perception, 2000; 29 (8): 893-909.
Cross, J.F., Cross, J. & Daley, J. Sex, race, age and beauty as factors in recognition of faces. Perception and Psychopbysics, 1971; 10, 393-396.
Curran, T., Tanaka, J.W., Weiskopf, D.M. Differentiating object categorization and recognition processes: A high density ERP study. Poster presented at the 7th Human Brain Mapping Conference, Brighton, UK, June 2001.
Davidoff, J.B. The specificity of face perception: Evidence from psychological investigations. In R. Bruyer (Ed.), Tbe Neuropsychology of Face Perception and Facial Expression. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum. 1986.
Davies, G.M., Ellis, H.D. & Shepherd, j.w. Cue saliency in faces as assessed by the photofit technique. Perception, 1977; 6, 263-269.
de Gelder B, Rouw R. Configural face processes in acquired and developmental prosopagnosia: evidence for two separate face system. Neuroreport, 2000, 11: 3145-3150.
de Gelder B, Rouw R. Paradoxical configuration effects for faces and objects in prosopagnosia. Neuropsychologia, 2000, 38: 1271-1279.
De Valois RL, De Valois KK. Spatial Vision. Oxford Univ. Press: New York; 1990.
Diamond, R. & Carey, S. Developmental changes in the representation of faces. Journal of Experimental Cbild Psychology, 1977; 23, 1-22.
Diamond, R. & Carey, S. Why faces are and are not special: An effect of expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1986; 115, 107-117.
Dziurawiec, S. Neonates’attention to faces. Paper presented at ESRC workshop ‘Developmental Aspects of Face Recognition’, Grange over Sands. 1987.
Edelman, S. Representation, similarity, and the chorus of prototypes. Minds and machines, 1995; 5, 45-68.
Eimer M.The face specific N170 component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces.Neuroreport, 2000; 11(10):2319-24.
Eimer, M. Does the face-specific N170 component reflect the activity of a specialized eye processor? Neuroreport, 1998; 9, 2945-2948.
Eimer, M. Effects of face inversion on the structural encoding and recognition of faces - Evidence from event-related brain potentials, Cognitive Brain Research, 2000a; 10, 145-158.
Eimer, M. The face-specific N170 component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces. Neuroreport, 2000b; 11 (10):2319-2324.
Eimer, M. & McCarthy, R.A. Prosopagnosia and structural encoding of faces: Evidence from event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 1999; 10(2): 255-259.
Ellis A W, Young A W, Flude B M. Repetition priming and face processing: Priming occurs within the system that responds to the identity of a face. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 1990, 42(A): 495-512.
Ellis, H.D. Recognizing faces. Britisb journal of Psychology. 1975; 66, 409-426.
Ellis, H.DThe role of the right hemisphere in face perception. In A. W. Young (Ed.), Functions of the Right Hemisphere. London:Academic Press.1983;
Ellis, H.D. Processes underlying face recognition. In R. Bruyer (Ed.), The Neuropsychology of Face Perception and Facial Expression. Hillsdale, Nj: Erlbaum. 1986a.
Ellis, H.D. Introduction to aspects of face processing: Ten questions in need of answers. In H.D. Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986b.
Ellis, H. D. & Shepherd, J. W. Recognition of upright and inverted faces presented in the left and right visual fields. Cortex, 1975; 11, 3-7.
Ellis, H. D. & Young, A. W. Are faces special? In A. W. Young & H. D. Ellis (Eds); Handbook of Research on Face Processing. Amsterdam: North Holland .1988.
Endo N, Endo M, Kirita T, Maruyama K. The effects of expression on face recognition. Tohoku Psychologica Folia.1992, 51: 37-44.
Endo, M. Cue saliency in upside-down faces. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1982; 41, 116-122.
Endo, M. Cue saliency in brietly presented faces: A comparison with cue saliency in upside-down faces. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1983; 42, 85-91.
Endo, M. Perception of upside-down faces: An analysis from the viewpoint of cue saliency. In H.D. Ellis, M.A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Epstein R, & Kanwisher, N. A cortical representation of the local visual environment, Nature, 1998; 392, 598-601.
Epstein, R., Harris, A., Stanley, D. & Kanwisher, N. The parahippocampal place area: recognition, navigation or encoding? Neuron, 1999; 23, 115-125.
Epstein, R.A., Higgins, J. S., Parker, W., Aguirre, G. K., & Cooperman, S. Cortical correlates of face and scene inversion: A comparison. Neuropsychologia, 2006; 44, 1145-1158.
Fagan, J. F. Infant’s recognition memory for faces. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1972; 14:453-476.
Fagan, J.F. Origins of facial pattern recognition. In M.H. Bornstein & W. Kessen (Eds), Psychological Development in Infancy: Image to Intention. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 1979.
Fagan, J.F. & Shepherd, P. A. Infants’ perception of orientation. Infant Behaviour and Development, 1979; 2,227-233.
Farah M J,Levinson K L,Klein K L.Face perception and within-category discrimination in prosopagnosia.Neuropsychologia,1995,33:661-674.
Farah M, Rabinowitz C, Quinn G et al. Early Commitment of Neural Substrates for Face Recognition. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17(1/2/3): 117-123.
Farah, M.J., Tanaka, J.W. & Drain, H.M. What causes the face inversion effect. Journal of experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1995; 21, 628-634.
Farah M J, Wilson K D, Drain HM et al., The inverted face inversion effect in prosopagnosia: Evidence for mandatory, face-specific perceptual mechanisms.Vision Research, 1995; 35:2089-2093.
Farah, M.J., Wilson, K.D., Drain, M. & Tanaka, J.N. What is "special" about face perception? Psychological Review, 1998; 105, 482-498.
Feinman, S. & Entwisle, D. R. Children’s ability to recognize other children’s faces. Child Development. 1976; 47, 506-510.
Flin, R.H. Age effects in children’s memory for unfamiliar faces. Developmental Psychology, 1980; 16, 373-374.
Flin, R. H. Development of face recognition: An encoding switch? British Journal of Psychology, 1985; 76, 123-134.
Fodor, J. A. The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 1983. Freeman, J. M. & Ellis, H. D. The effects of stimulus and subject factors on a face matching task. Neuropsychologica, 1984; 22, 635-638.
Freire A., Lee, K. & Symons, L.A. The face-inversion effect as a deficit in the encoding of configural information: Direct evidence. Perception, 2000; 29,159-170.
Friederici AD. Neurophysiological aspects of language processing J.Clin-Neurosci,1997,4(2):64-72.
Galper, R. E. Recognition of faces in photographic negative. Psychonomic Science, 1970; 19, 207-208.
Galper, R. E. & Hochberg, J. Recognition memory for photographs of faces. American Journal of Psychology, 1971; 84, 351-354.
Gandour J, WongD, Hsieh L, et al. A crosslinguistic PET study of tone percep tion. J Cogn Neurosci, 2000, 12: 207-222.
Gauthier, I. Dissecting Face Recognition: The Role of Categorization Level and Expertise in Visual Object Recognition. Unpublished Dissertation,Yale University. 1998.
Gauthier, I., Anderson, A., Skudlarski, P. & Gore, J.C. Expertise for cars and birds recruits middle fusiform face-selective areas, Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 191-197. Gauthier I, Behrmann M, Tarr M J. Can face recognition really be dissociated from object recognition? Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1999, 11: 349-370.
Gauthier, I. & Tarr, M.J. Becoming a “Greeble” expert: exploring the facerecognition mechanism. Vision Research, 1997; 37, 1673-1682.
Gauthier, I., Tarr, M.J., Anderson, A.W., Skudlarski, P. & Gore, J.C. Activation of the middle fusiform area increases with expertise in recognizing novel objects. Nature Neuroscience, 1999; 6, 568-573.
Gauthier, I., Tarr, M. J., Moylan, J., Skudlarski, P., Gore, J. C., & Anderson, A.W. The fusiform "face area" is part of a network that processes faces at the individual level. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2000; 12(3): 495-504.
Gauthier, I., Williams, P., Tarr, M.J. & Tanaka, J. Training ‘greeble’ experts: a framework for studying expert object recognition processes. Vision Research, 1998; 38, 2401-2428.
Gelder, B. & Zoontjes, R. Hemispheric asymmetries for whole-based and parts-based face processing in the human fusiform gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2000b; 12, 793-802.
George N, Evans J, Fiori N, Davidoff J, Renault B. Brain events related to normal and moderately scrambled faces..Cognitive Brain Research, 1996; 4(2):65-76.
George N,Jemel B,Fiori N et al Face and shape repetition effects in humans:A spatio-ternporal ERP study.Neuroreport,1997; 8:1417-1423.
Gibling, F., Ellis, H.D. & Shepherd, J. W. The influence of distinctiveness in the recognition of faces. Paper presented at ESRC workshop ‘Developmental Aspects of Face Recognition’, Grange over Sands. 1987.
Gilbert, C. & Bakan, P. Visual asymmetry in perception of faces. Neuropsychologia, 1973; 11, 355-362.
Goldstein, A. G. Learning of inverted and normally oriented faces in children and adults. Psychonomic Science, 1965; 3, 447-448.
Goldstein, A. G. Recognition of inverted photographs of faces in children and adults. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1975; 127, 109-123.
Goldstein, A. G. & Chance, J. E. Memory for faces and schema theory. Journal of Psychology, 1980; 105, 47-59.
Goldstein, A, G. & Chance, J. E. Laboratory studies of face recognition. In G. Davies, H. Ellis & J. Shepherd Eds; Perceiving and Remembering Faces. London: Academic Press. 1981.
Goren, C. C., Sarty, M. & Wu, P. Visual following and pattern discrimination of face-like stimuli by newborn infants. Pediatrics, 1975; 56, 544-545.
Gregory, R. L. The confounded eye. In R. L. Gregory & E. H. Gombrich Eds; Illusion in Nature and Art. London: Duckworth. 1973.
Grice, S.J., Spratling, M.W., Karmilnoff-Smith, A., Halit, H., Csibra, G, deHaan, M. & Johnson, M.H. 2001; Disordered visual processing and oscillatory brain activity in autism and Williams Syndrome. Neuroreport, 12, 2697-2700.
Goldstone, R.L., Schyns, P.G. & Medin, D.L. (Eds).; The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 36, pp.83-125. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Guillaume, F. & Tiberghien, G. An event-related potential study of contextual modifications in a face recognition task. Neuroreport, 2001; 12, 1209-1216.
Hagoort P, Indefrey P, Brown C, et al. The neural circuitry involved in the reading of German words and pseudowords: A PET study. J Cogn Neurosci, 1999, 11: 383-398.
Halgren, E., Dale, A.M., Sereno, M.I., Tootell, R.B.H., Marinkovic, K. & Rosen, B. Location of human face-selective cortex with respect to retinotopic areas. Human Brain Mapping, 1999; 7, 29-37.
Halgren E, Raij T, Marinkovic K, Jousmaki V, Hari R. Cognitive response profile of the human fusiform face area as determined by MEG. Cereb Cortex 2000; 10: 69-81. Halit H, de Haan M, Johnson MH. Modulation of event-related potentials by prototypical and atypical faces. NeuroReport 2000; 11: 1871-1875.
Hardyck,C.,O.J.L.Tzeng,and W.S.-Y.Wang. Ceretral lateralization effects in visual half-field experiments. Nature, 1977. 269:705-707.
HattaThe effects of Kanji attributs of visual field diferences: Examination with lexical desicion, naming and sementic classification tasks. Neuropsychologia, 1992; 4, 361-371.
Hatta, T. Tachistoscopic recognition of Kana and Kanji. Neuropsychologia, 1977; 15, 685-688.
Haxby J V, Gobbini M I, Furey M L, Ishai A, Schouten J L, Pletrini P. Distributed and overlapping representations of faces and objects in ventral temporal cortex. Science, 2001, 2935539: 2425-2430.
Haxby J V, Hoffman E A, Gobbini M I. Human Neural Systems for Face Recognition and Social Communication. Biology Psychiatry, 2002, 51: 59-67.
Haxby, J.V., Hoffman, E.A. & Gobbini, M.I. The distributed human neural system for face perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2000; 4, 223-233.
Haxby, J.V., Ungerleider, L.G., Clark, V.P., Schouten, J.L., Hoffman, E.A. & Martin, A. The effect of face inversion on activity in human neural systems for face and object perception. Neuron, 1999; 22, 189-199.
Hay, D. C. & Young, A. W. The human face. In A. W. Ellis Ed.; Normality and Pathology in Cognitive Function. London: Academic Press. 1982.
Hayes, T., Morrone, M. C. & Burr, D.C. Recognition of positive and negative bandpass-filtered images. Perception, 1986; 15, 595-602.
Hillger, L.A. & Koenig, O. Separable Mechanisms in face processing: evidence from hemispheric specialization. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1991; 3, 42-58.
Hoffman, E.A. & Haxby, J.V. Distinct representations of eye gaze and identity in the distributed human neural system for face perception. Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 80-84.
Holeomb PJ.Semantic priming and stimulus degradation:implication for the role of the N 400 in language processing.Psychophysiol0gy,1993,301:47-61.
Holcomb P J, Anderson J E. Cross-modal semantic priming: A time-course analysis using event-related potentials. Lang. Cogn. Processes, 1993, 8: 379-411.
Huang J T, WangM Y. From unit to gestalt: perceptual dynamics in recognizing Chinese characters A. Language processing in Chinese, 1992.
Hung, D.L. and Tzeng O.J.L. Orthographic variation and visual information processing.Psychology Bulletin 1981; 90:377-414.
Hubeber M,Shoham D,Grinvald A et al. Spatial relationship among three columar systems in cat area 17.Journal of Neuroscience,1997,17:9270-9284.
Illes J, FrancisWS, Desmond JE, et al. Convergent cortical representation of semantic p rocessing in bilinguals. Brain Lang, 1999, 70: 347-363.
Ishai A,Ungerleider L G,Martin A, Schouten, J.L. & Haxby, J.V. Distributed representation of objects in the human ventral visual pathway. Proceedings Of The National Academy of Sciences of The United States of America, 1999, 96: 9379-9384.
Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. Effects of repetition learning on upright, inverted, and contrast-reversed face processing using ERPs. Neuroimage 2004; 21: 1518-1532.
Jeffreys, D.A. A face-responsive potential recorded from the human scalp. Experimental Brain Research, 1989; 78, 193-202.
Itier RJ, Taylor MJ. Inversion and contrast polarity reversal affect both encoding and recognition processes of unfamiliar faces: a repetition study using ERPs. NeuroImage 2002; 15: 353-372.
Jeffreys, D.A. The influence of stimulus orientation on the vertex positive scalp potential evoked by faces. Experimental Brain Research, 1993; 96, 163-172.
Jemel, B., George, N., Chaby, L., Fiori, N. & Renault, B. Differential processing of part-to-whole and part-to-part face priming: an ERP study. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 1069-1075.
Kagan, J. & Klein, R. E. Cross-cultural perspectives on early development. American Psychologist, 1973; 28, 947-961.
Kanwisher N. Domain specificity in face perception. Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 759-763.
Kanwisher, N., Downing, P., Epstein, R., &Kourtzi, Z. Functional Neuroimaging of Human Visual Recognition. In R. Cabeza & A. Kingstone (Eds); The Handbook on Functional Neuroimaging. pg 109-152.Cambridge: MIT press. 2001.
Kanwisher N, McDermott J, Chun M M. The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 1997, 1711: 4302-4311.
Kanwisher, N., Tong, F. & Nakayama, K. The effect of face inversion on the human fusiform face area. Cognition, 1998; 68, B1-B11.
Keenan J P, McCutcheon B, Freund S. Left hand advantage in a self-face recognition task. Neuropsychologia, 1999, 37: 1421-1425.
Keenan JP, Nelson A, O’Connor M et al. Self-recognition and the right hemisphere. Nature, 2001, 409: 305.
Kemp, R., McManus, C. & Pigott, T. Sensitivity to the displacement of facial features in negative and inverted images. Perception, 1990; 19, 531-543.
Tanaka, J.W. & Sengco, J.A. Features and their configuration in face recognition. Memory and Cognition, 1997; 25, 583-592.
Kleiner, K. A. Amplitude and phase spectra as indices of infants’ pattern preferences. Infant Behavior and Development, 1987; 10, 49-59.
Kleiner, K. A. & Banks, M. S. Stimulus energy does not account for 2-month-olds’ face preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1987; 13, 594-600.
Koenig, O. Separable Mechanisms in face processing: evidence from hemispheric specialization. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1991; 3, 42-58.
Kohler, W. Dynamics in Psychology. New York: Liveright. 1940.
Kolb, B., Milner, B. & Taylor, L. Perception of faces by patients with localized corrical excisions. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1983; 37, 8-18.
Kuo WJ, Yeh TC, Duann JR, et al. A left-lateralized network for reading Chinese words: a 3T fMR I study. Neuroreport, 2001, 12: 3997-4001.
Kutas M,Hillyard SA.An electrophysiological probe of incidental semantic associationJ.J Cngn Neurosci,1989,l1:38- 49.
Kutas M,Hillyard SA.Reading senseless sentences:brain Potential reflect semantic incongruity.Science,1980,207:203-205.
Kutas M, McCarthy G, Donchin E. Augmenting mental chronomentry: the P300 as a measure of stimulus eveluation time. Science, 1977;197:792-795.。
Kutas M,Neville HJ,Holcomb PJ.A preliminarv comparison of the N400 respo nse to semantic anomalies during reading,listening and signing.Electroencephalogr Clin Neutophysiol,1987,39:325-330.
Kutas, M., and Van Petten, C.K. Psycholinguistics electrified event-related brain potential investigation. Handbook of Psycholinguistics, Edited by Morton Ana, Gernsbachev, Academic Press.INC. 1994.
Kutas M,Van Petten C,Besson M Event-related potentials asymmtries during the reading sentences.Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol,1988,69:218-223.
Leder, H, & Bruce, V. Local and relational aspects of face distinctiveness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 1998; 51, 449-473.
Leder, H. & Bruce, V. When inverted faces are recognized: The role of configural information in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 2000; 53, 513-536.
Leder H, Candrian G, Huber O. & Bruce, V. Configural features in the context of upright and inverted faces. Perception, 2001; 30, 73-83.
Leehey, S., Carey, S., Diamond, R. & Cahn, A. Upright and inverted faces: The right hemisphere knows the difference. Cortex, 1978; 14-411-419.
Levine, S. C., Banich, M.T. & Koch-Weser, M.P. Face recognition: A general or specific right hemisphere capacity? Brain and Cognition. 1988; 8(3):303-25.
Levy, I., Hasson, U., Avidan, G., Hendler, T., Malach, R. Center-periphery organization of human object areas. Nature Neuroscience, 2001; 4, 533-539.
Light, L. L., Kayra-Start, F. & Hollander, S. Recognition memory for typical and unusual faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1979; 5, 218-223.
Linkenkaer-Hansen, K., Palva, J.M., Sams, M., Hietanen, J.K., Aronen H.J & Ilmoniemi, R.J. Face-selective processing in human extrastriate cortex around 120 ms after stimulus onset revealed by magneto- and electroencephalography. Neuroscience letters, 1998; 253, 147-150.
Liu J, Higuchi M, Marantz A. & Kanwisher N. The selectivity of the occipitotemporal M170 for faces. Neuroreport, 2000; 11, 337-341.
Logothetis, N.K, Pauls, J., Augath, M., Trinath, T. & Oeltermann, A. Neurophysiological investigation of the basis of the fMRI signal. Nature, 2001; 412, 150-157.
Marinkovic K, Trebon P, Chauvel P et al. Localized face-processing by the human prefrontal cortex: Face-selective intracerebral potentials and post-lesion deficits. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17: 187-199.
Maruyama, K. & Endo, M. The effect of face orientation upon apparent direction of gaze. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1983; 42,126-138.
Maruyama, K. & Endo, M. Illusory face dislocation effect and configural integration in the inverted face. Toboku Psychologica Folia, 1984; 43, 150-160.
Matthews PM, Adcock J, Chen Y, et al. Towards understanding language organisation in the brain using fMR I. Hum Brain Mapp, 2003, 18: 239-247.
Maurer D, Grand R L, Mondloch C J. The many faces of configural processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2002, 66: 255-260.
McCarthy, G., Puce, A., Belger, A. & Allison, T. Electrophysiological studies of human face perception: response properties of face-specific potentials generated in occipitotemporal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 1999; 9, 431-444.
McCarthy G, Puce A, Gore J C Allison, T.. Face-specific processing in the human fusiform gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1997, 9: 605-610.
McCallum W C, Farmer S F, Pocick P V. The effects of physical and semantic incogruities on auditory event-related potentials. Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol., 1984, 59: 477-488.
McCandliss, B.D., Cohen, L., & Dehaene, S. The visual word form area: expertise for reading in the fusiform gyrus. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003, 7(7): 293-299
McClelland, J. L. & Rumelhart, D. E. Distributed memory and the representation of general and specific information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1985; 114, 159-188.
McGurk, H. The role of object orientation in infant perception. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1970; 9, 363-373.
McNeil J, Warrington E. Prosopagnosia: a face-specific disorder. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1993, 46A: 1-10.
Mesulam M M.From sensation to cognition.Brain, 1998, 121:1013-1052.
Miyamoto T,Katayama J,Koyama T.ERPs,semantic Processing and ageJ.Int J Psychophysiol,1998,29(1):43-51.
Milivojevic B, Clapp WC, Johnson BW, Corballis MC. Turn that frown upside down: ERP effects of thatcherization of misoriented faces. Psychophysiology 2003; 40: 967– 978.
Moscovitch, M. Behrmann, M. & Winocur, G. What is special about face recognition ? Nineteen experiments on a person with visual object agnosia and dyslexia but normal face recognition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1997; 9, 555-604.
Mouchetant RY, Giard MH, Bentin S, Aguera PE, Pernier J. Neurophysiological correlates of face gender processing in humans. Eur J Neurosci 2000; 12: 303-310.
Munte, T.F., Brack, M., Grootheer, O., Wieringa, B.M., Matzke, M., Johannes, S. Brain potentials reveal the timing of face identity and expression judgments. Neuroscience Research, 1998; 30, 25-34.
Murray, J.E., Yong, E. & Rhodes, G. Revisiting the perception of upside-down faces. Psychological. Science, 2000; 11, 492-496.
Nachson, I. On the modularity of face recognition: the riddle of domain specificity. Journal of Clinical and experimental Neuropsychology, 1995; 17, 256-275.
Niznikiewicz M, Squires N K. Phonological processing and the role of strategy in silent reading: Behavioral and electrophysological evidence. Brain Lang., 1996; 52: 342-364.
Olichney JM , Van-Petten C , Paller KA word repetition in amnesia. Electrophysiologocal measure of impaired and spared memoryJ.Brain,2000,123(Pt 9):1948-1963.
Parks, T.E., Letter to the editor. Perception, 1983; 12, 88.
Parks, T. E., Coss, R.G. & Coss, C. S. Thatcher and the Cheshire cat: Context and the processing of facial features. Perception, 1985; 14:747-754.
Parr, L.A., Dove, T. & Hopkins, W.D. Why faces may be special: Evidence of the inversion effect in chimpanzees. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 1998; 10:615-622.
Paulesu E, McCrory E, Fazio F, et al. A cultural effect on brain function. Nat Neurosci, 2000, 3: 91-96.
Penfield, W. and L.Roberts. Speech and Brain Mechanisms. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1959.
Perrett, D.I., Mistlin, A.J., Chitty, A.J., Smith, P.A.J., Potter, D.D., Broennimann, R. & Harries, M. Specialized face processing and hemispheric asymmetry in man and monkey: evidence from single unit and reaction times studies. Behavioral Brain Research, 1988; 29, 245-258.
Perrett, D.I., Oram, M.W. & Ashbridge, E. Evidence accumulation in cell populations responsive to faces: an account of generalisation of recognition without mental transformations. Cognition, 1998; 67, 111-145.
Phelps, M.T. & Roberts, W.A. Memory for pictures of upright and inverted primate faces in humans squirrel-monkeys, and pigeons. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 1994; 108, 114-125.
Phillips M L, Young A W, Senior C et al. A specific neural substrate for perceiving facial expressions of disgust. Nature, 1997, 389: 495-498.
83. Phillips, R. J. Some exploratory experiments on memory for photographs of faces. Acta Psychologica, 1979; 43, 39-56.
84.Phillips, R. J. & Rawles, R. E. Recognition of upright and inverted faces: A correlational study. Perception, 1979; 8,577-583.
Puce A,Allison T,Gore JC et al.Face sensitive regions in human extrastiate cortex studied by functional MRI.Journal of Neurophysiology,1995,74:1192-1199.
Puce A, Allison T,McCarthy G.Electrophysiological studies of human face perception.Ⅲ:Effects of top-down processing on face-specific potentials.Cerebral Cortex,1999, 9:445-458.
Pulvermuller F. Words in the brain’s language. Behav Brain Sci, 1999, 22: 253-336.
Rakover, S.S. & Teucher, B. Facial inversion effects: Parts and whole relationship. Perception and psychophysics, 1997; 59: 752-761.
85. Rapacaynski, W. & Ehrlichman, H. Opposite visual hemifield superiorities in face recognition as a function of cognitive style. Neuropsychologia, 1979; 17, 645-652.
Rebai, M., Poiroux, S., Bernard, C. & Lalonde, R. Event-related potentials for category-specific information during passive viewing of faces and objects. International Journal of Neuroscience, 2001; 106, 209-226. 86. Rhodes, G. Lateralized processes in face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 1985; 76, 249-271.
Rhodes, G., Brennan, S. & Carey, S. Recognition and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 1987; 19, 473-497.
Riesenhuber, M. & Poggio, T. Hierarchical models of object recognition in cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 1999; 2, 1019-1025.
Rock, I. Orientation and Form. New York: Academic Press. 1973;
Rock, I. The perception of disoriented figures. Scientific American, 1974; 230, 78-85.
Rolls, E.T. Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying face processing within and beyond the temporal cortical visual areas.Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond B,
1992; 335, 11-21.
Rossion, B., Delvenne, J.F., Debatisse, D., Goffaux, V., Bruyer, R., Crommelinck, M. & Guérit, J.-M. Spatio-temporal localization of the face inversion effect: an event-related potentials study. Biological Psychology, 1999a; 50, 173-189.
Rossion, B., Campanella, S., Gomez, C., Delinte, A., Debatisse, D., Liard, L., Dubois, S., Bruyer, R., Crommelinck, M. & Guérit, J. M. Task Modulation of Brain Activity Related to Familiar and Unfamiliar Face Processing: an ERP Study. Clinical Neurophysiology, 1999b; 110, 449-462.
Rossion, B., Gauthier, I., Tarr, M.J., Despland, P.A., Bruyer, R., Linotte, S. & Crommelinck, M. The N170 occipito-temporal component is enhanced and delayed to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face-specific processes in the human brain. 2000a; Neuroreport, 11, 69-74.
Rossion, B., Dricot, L., De Volder, A., Bodart, J.-M., Crommelinck, M., de Gelder, B. & Zoontjes, R. Hemispheric asymmetries for whole-based and parts-based face processing in the human fusiform gyrus. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 2000b; 12, 793-802.
Rossion B. and Gauthier I. How does the brain process upright and inverted faces? Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2002; 1(1):63-75.
Rossion B , Gauthier I , Tarr MJ , et al. The N170 occipito -temporal component is delayed and enhanced to inverted faces but not to inverted objects: an electrophysiological account of face - specific processes in the human brain. Cognitive Neuroscience, 2002, 111(117): 69-74.
Ruchkin DS, Johnson R, Grafman J, Canoune H, Ritter W. Multiple visuospatial working memory buffers: Evidence from spatiotemporal patterns of brain activity. Neuropsychologia, 1997; 35:195-209.
Rugg M D, Doyle M C, Wells T. Word and nonword repetition within- and across-modality: An event-related potential study. J. Cogn. Neurosci., 1995, 7: 209-227.
Ruyer, R., Galvez, C. & Prairial, C. Effect of disorientation on visual analysis, familiarity decision and semantic decision on faces. British Journal of Psychology, 1993; 84, 433-441.
Sagiv, N. & Bentin, S. Structural encoding of human and schematic faces: holistic and part-based processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2001; 13(7):937-51.
Scapinello, K.F. & Yarmey, A. D. The role of familiarity and orientation in immediate and delayed recognition of pictorial stimuli. Psychonomic Science, 1970; 21, 329-330.
Schultz, R. T., Gauthier, I., Klin, A., Fulbright, R.K., Anderson, A.W., Volkmar, F., Skudlarski, P., Lacadie, C., Cohen, D.J., & Gore, J.C. Abnormal ventral temporal cortical activity during face discrimination among individuals with autism and Asperger syndrome. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 2000; 57: 331-40.
Schyns P G, Oliva A. Dr. Angry and Mr. Smile: when categorization flexibly modifies the perception of faces in rapid visual presentations. Cognition, 1999, 69: 243-265.
Schyns, P.G. & Rodet, L. Categorization creates functional features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning and Memory, 1997; 23, 681-696.
Searcy, J.H. & Bartlett, J.C. Inversion and processing of component and spatialrelational information in faces. Journal of experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1996; 22, 904-915.
Seeck, M, Michel, CM, Mainwaring, N, Cosgrove, R, Blume, H, Ives, J, Landis, T, Schomer, DL. Evidence for rapid face recognition from human scalp and intracranial electrodes. Neuroreport, 1997; 8, 2749-54.
Seidenberg, M. S. The time course of phonological code activation in two writing system. Cognition, 1985; 19(1):1-30.
Seidenberg, M. S., McCleland, J. L. A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 1989; 96(4):523-68.
Sergent, J. An investigation into component and configural processes underlying face perception. British Journal of Psychology, 1984; 75, 221-242.
Sergent, J. Influence of task and input factors on hemispheric involvement in face processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1985; 10, 554-572.
Sergent, J. Microgenesis of face perception. In H.D. Ellis, M. A. Jeeves, F. Newcombe & A. Young Eds; Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Sergent J, Ohta S, Macdonald. Functional neuroanatomy of face and object processing.Brain, A positron emission tomography study. 1992; 115:15-36.
Shepard, R. N. & Metzler, J. Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 1971; 171:701-703.
Shepherd, J. Social factors in face recognition. In G. Davies, H. Ellis & J. Shepherd (Eds), Perceiving and Remembering Faces. London: Academic Press. 1981.
Shepherd, J. W. & Deregowski, J. B. Races and faces a comparison of the responses of Africans and Europeans to faces of the same and different races. British Journal of Social Psychology, 1981; 20, 125-133.
Shulman GL, Corbetta M, Buckner RL, Raichle ME, Fiez JA, Miezin FM, et al. Top-down modulation of early sensory cortex. Cereb Cortex, 1997; 7: 193-206.
Simion, F., Macchi Cassia, V., Turati, C & Valenza, E. The origins of face perception: Specific vs. non-specific mechanisms. Paper presented at the Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN, April. 2001.
Singer W. & Gray, C.M. Visual feature integration and the temporal correlation hypothesis. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 1995; 18, 555-586.
Small, M. Hemisphere differences in the evoked potedtial to face stimuli. In H. D. Ellis, M. A. Jeeves, I. Newcombe & A. Young (Eds), Aspects of Face Processing. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. 1986.
Sorce, J. F. & Campos, J. J. The role of expression in the recognition of a face. American Journal of Psychology, 1974; 87, 71-82.
Streit M, Wolwer W, Brinkmeyer J. Electrophysiological correlates of emotional and structural face processing in humans. Neuroscience Letters, 2002; 278:13- 16.
Stuss D T, Picton T W, Cerri A M. Searching for the names of pictures: An event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 1986; 23: 215-223.
Sugase Y, Yamane S, Ueno S, Kawano K. Global and fine information coded by single neurons in the temporal visual cortex. Nature, 1999; 400: 869-873.
Swindale N S.Cortical organization: Modules, polymaps and mosaics. Current biology, 1998; 8:R270-R273.
Takane, Y. & Sergent, J. Multidimensional scaling models for reaction times and same-different judgments. Psychometrika, 1983; 48, 393-423.
Taft M. Reading and the mental lexicon M. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Assccs, 1991.
Taft M, Zhu X. Submorphemic processing in reading Chinese. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1994; 23 (3): 761-775.
Tallon-Baudry C, Bertrand O. Oscillatory gamma activity in humans and its role in object representation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1999; 3, 151-162.
Taylor MJ. Non-spatial attentional effects on P1. Clin Neurophysiol 2002; 113: 1903–1908.
Taylor MJ, Edmonds GE, McCarthy G, Allison T. Eyes first! Eye processing develops before face processing in children. NeuroReport 2001; 12: 1671–1676.
Tan LH, Liu HL, Perfetti CA, et al. The neural system underlying Chinese logograph reading. Neuroimage, 2001, 13: 836-846.
Tan LH, Sp inks JA, Feng CM, et al. Neural systems of second language reading are shaped by native language. Hum Brain Mapp, 2003, 18: 158-166.
Tan LH, Sp inks JA, Gao JH, et al. Brain activation in the p rocessing of Chinese characters and words: a functional MRI study. Hum BrainMapp, 2000, 10: 16-27.
Tan LH, Sp inks JA, Gao JH, et al. Brain activation in the processing of Chinese characters and words: a functionalMRI study. Hum Brain Mapp, 2000, 10: 16-27.
Tanaka, J.W. & Curran, T. A neural basis for expert object recognition. Psychological Science, 2001; 12, 43-47.
Tanaka, J.W. & Farah, M.J. Parts and wholes in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1993; 46A, 225-245.
Tanaka, J.W. & Gauthier, I. Expertise in object and face recognition. In Goldstone, R.L., Schyns, P.G. & Medin, D.L. (Eds.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol.36, pp.83-125. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. 1997.
Tanaka, J.W. Luu, P., Weisbrod, M. & Kiefer, M. Tracking the time course of object categorization using event-related potentials. Neuroreport, 1999; 10, 829-835.
Tanaka, J.W. & Taylor, M. Object categories and expertise: Is the basic level in the eye of the beholder? Cognitive Psychology, 1991; 23, 457-482.
Tarr, M.J & Gauthier, I. FFA: a flexible fusiform area for subordinate-level visual processing automatized by expertise. Nature Neuroscience, 2000; 3, 764-769.
Taylor, M.J., Itier, R.J., Allison, T. & Edmonds, G. Direction of gaze effects on early face processing: eyes-only versus full faces. Cognitive Brain Research, 2001; 10(3):333-340.
Taylor, M.J., McCarthy, G., Saliba, E. & Degiovanni, E. ERP evidence of developmental changes in processing of faces, Clinical Neurophysiology, 1999; 110, 910-915.
Thompson, P. Margaret Thatcher, A new illusion. Perception, 1980; 9, 483-484.
Toyama, J. S. The effect of orientation on the recognition of faces: A reply to Yin. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, Canada. 1975.
Trejo L J, Ryan-Jones D L, Kramer A F. Attentional modulation of the mismatch negativity elicited by frequency differences between binaurally presented tone bursts. Psychophysiology, 1995, 32: 319-328.
Valentine, T. Encoding processes in face recognition. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Nottingham. 1986.
Valentine, T. A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1991; 43A2; 161-204.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. What’s Up? The Margaret Thatcher illusion revisited. Perception 1985; 14, 515-516.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. The effect of race, inversion and encoding activity upon face recognition. Acta Psychologica, 1986a; 61, 259-273.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. Recognizing familiar faces: The role of distinctiveness and familiarity. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1986b; 40, 300-305.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. The effects of distinctiveness in recognising and classifying faces. Perception, 1986; 15, 525-535.
Valentine, T. & Bruce, V. Mental rotation of faces. Memory and Cognition .1988; 16(6):556-66.
Valenza, E., Simion, F., Mucchi Cassia, V. & Umilta, C. Face preference at birth. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Perception and Performance, 1996; 22: 892-903.
Vignal J P, Chauvel P, Halgren E. Localized face-processing by the human prefrontal cortex: Stimulation-evoked hallucinations of faces. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2000, 17: 281-291.
Walter H, Vetter S, Grothe J, Wunderlich A, Hahn S, Spitzer M. The neural correlates of driving. Neuroreport, 2001; 12:1763-1767.
Watson, J. S. Perception of object orientation in infants. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1966; 12, 73-94.
Zhou,X. ,&Marslen-Wilson ,W. Direct visual access is the only way to access the Chinese mental lexicon. In Proceeding of the 18th Annual Conference of Cognitive Science Society, 1996.
Wernicke, C.1874.Der aphasische Symptomencomplex.Eine psychologische Studie auf Anatomischer Basis.Breslau:Kohn und Weigert.The symptom complex of aphasia.A psychological study of an anatomical basis. In R.S.Cohen and M.W.Wartofsky,eds.,1966/1968,Boston Studies in the
Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the Boston Colloquium for the Philosophy of Science, Volume IV.Dordrecht-Holland: D.Reidel.
Xu, Y., Liu, J., & Kanwisher, N. The M170 is selective for faces, not for expertise. Neuropsychologia, 2005; 43: 588–597.
Yarmey, A. D. Recognition memory for familiar ‘public’ faces: Effects of orientation and delay. Psychonomic Science, 1971; 24: 286-288.
Yin, R. K. Looking at upside-down faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969; 81, 141-145.
Yin, R. K. Face recognition: A dissociable ability? Neuropsychologia, 1970a; 23, 395-402.
Yin, R. K. Face recognition: A special process? Unpublished PHD thesis, MIT. 1970b.
Yin, R. K. Face perception: A review of experiments with infants, normal adults, and brain-injured persons. In R Held, H. W. Leibowitz & H. L. Teuber (Eds), Handbook of Sensory Physiology, vol, 8 Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 1978.
Young, A. W. Right hemisphere superiority for recognizing the internal and external features of famous faces. British Journal of Psychology, 1984; 75, 161-169.
Young, A. W. Face recognition. In H. Beloff & A Colman (Eds), Psychology Survey, 6 Leicester: BPS. 1987.
Young, A. W. & Bion, P.J. Absence of any developmental trend in right hemisphere superiority for face receognition. Cortex, 1980; 16: 213-221.
Young, A. W. & Bion, P. J. Accuracy of naming laterally presented known faces by children and adults. Cortex, 1981; 17, 97-106.
Young, A. W., Hellawell, D. & Hay, D. C. Configurational information in face perception. Perception, 1987; 16: 747-759.
Young A W, Newcombe F, de Hann E H F et al. Face perception after brain injury: Selective impairments affecting identity and expression. Brain, 1993, 116: 941-959.
陈传锋,黄希庭. 结构对称性汉字认知:研究与应用. 北京:新华出版社, 2004.
陈传锋,黄希庭.结构对称性汉字视觉识别特定的实验研究.心理学报,1999;312: 154-161.
陈 璇 . 中 西 文 N400 的 研 究 现 状 简 述 1 临 床 神 经 电 生 理 学 杂 志 ,2004a;131:53-55.
陈 璇 . 中 西 文 N400 的 研 究 现 状 简 述 2 临 床 神 经 电 生 理 学 杂 志 ,2004b;132:118-120.
冯晓源, 刘含秋. 功能磁共振成像在中国的研究现状. 中国医学计算机成像杂志, 2004; 10: 292-298.
高定国,郭可教.对汉字认知与大脑两半球关系研究的一些回顾.心理科学,1993, 16(6):363-368.
管益杰 方富熹. 我国汉字识别研究的新进展 心理学动态 2000;8(2):1-6.
管益杰,李燕芳,宋 艳. 汉字字形加工的关键特征模型 山东师范大学学报, 2006;512:126-129.
梁丹丹 中国神经语言学的回顾与前瞻.当代语言学,2004;62:139-153.
李勇, 赵高年, 谢鹏. 功能磁共振成像与语言学研究. 实用神经疾病杂志, 2004;7: 36-37.
楼良岗,范思陆.事件相关电位ERPs反映汉字与其心理模板的失匹配.心理学报,1989;213:321-327.
罗耀嘉主编. 认知神经科学教程. 北京:北京大学出版社,2006.130-131.
罗跃嘉,魏景汉.汉字识别的跨感觉通路ERP注意成分研究.中国科学,1998;6:508-515.
罗跃嘉, 魏景汉. 正常青年人汉字语义识别的 ERP 特征性成分, 中国科学院心理研究所年报, 1997; 42-43.
罗跃嘉,魏景汉.中西文的事件相关电位N400研究现状.心理学动态,1998;63; 1-5.
马林, 唐一潭, 王岩, 等. 汉字处理相关大脑皮层区的功能磁共振成像. 中华放射学杂志, 2002; 36: 198-201.
彭聃龄. 汉语认知研究. 济南:山东教育出版社,1997.
彭聃龄、王春茂. 汉字识别的基本单元-来自笔画数效应和部件数效应的研究,心理学报,(1997)29(1):7-12.
沈 模 卫 , 朱 祖 祥 . 部 件 启 动 对 合 体 汉 字 识 别 的 影 响 . 心 理 科 学 , 1997;203:206-211.
沈模卫,朱祖祥. 整体汉字字形识别过程探索. 应用心理学, 1995, 12: 43-48.
孙相如、董瑞国、高素荣.汉字形音义分类的事件相关脑电位. 第六届中国语文--认知科学国际研讨会论文,台北. 1993.
王乃怡两耳分听歌曲时大脑两半球功能的非对称性,心理学报,1984;1,75-78.
汪亚珉 傅小兰 面部表情识别与面孔身份识别的独立加工与交互作用机制 心里科学进展,2005;13(4):497-516.
魏景汉, 罗跃嘉主编. 认知事件相关脑电位教程. 经济日报出版社. 2002.
魏景汉, 匡培梓, 张东松等. 全视野汉字词义联想的ERP特征与汉字认识的ERP甄别. 心理学报, 1995; 274: 413-419.
伍建林, 何立岩, 宋清伟, 等. 功能磁共振成像在人脑数字及汉字认知加工中的初步研究. 中国临床康复, 2003; 7: 2690-2691.
肖 崇 好 , 黄 希 庭 . 汉 字 独 体 字 识 别 中 的 框 架 结 构 效 应 . 心 理 科学,1998;213:221-225.
徐岩 张亚旭 周晓林 面孔加工的认知神经科学研究:回顾与展望 心理科学进展,2003;11(1):35-43.
严建雯,孙善麟,汉字识别的加工模型 宁波大学学报,2005,18 3:329-332.
喻柏林,曹河圻等.汉字形码和音码的整体性对部件识别的影响.心理学报,1990;223: 232-239.
喻柏林,曹河圻.汉字识别中的笔画数效应新探--兼论字频效应.心理学报,1992;242:120-126.
喻柏林,冯玲等.汉字的视知觉-知觉任务效应和汉字的属性效应.心理学,1990;222:141-147.
张侃, 冯玲, 陈楚晖, 等. 语言与音乐刺激下脑功能活动的MR功能成像研究. 中华放射学杂志, 1999;33: 311-315.
张明岛, 陈兴时等编著. 脑诱发电位学. 上海科技教育出版社. 1995.
张娜,翁旭初,罗本燕 汉字阅读加工的功能磁共振研究进展 国际脑血管病杂志,2006;143:216-218.
张伟伟, 陈玉翠, 沈政. 从面孔模块到马赛克——视觉特异加工的脑机制. 心理学报, 2001;332: 182-188.
张武田,冯玲.关于汉字识别加工单位的研究.心理学报,1992,244:379-385
周晓林. 语义激活中语音的有限作用.济南:山东教育出版社,1997.
朱晓平.汉语字词识别的现状.心理科学,1992;1:40-45.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |