Facial age aftereffects provide some evidence for local repulsion (but none for re-normalisation)

2Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Face aftereffects can help adjudicate between theories of how facial attributes are encoded. O'Neil and colleagues (2014) compared age estimates for faces before and after adapting to young, middle-aged or old faces. They concluded that age aftereffects are best described as a simple renormalisation- e.g. after adapting to old faces, all faces look younger than they did initially. Here I argue that this conclusion is not substantiated by the reported data. The authors fit only a linear regression model, which captures the predictions of re-normalisation, but not alternative hypotheses such as local repulsion away from the adapted age. A second concern is that the authors analysed absolute age estimates after adaptation, as a function of baseline estimates, so goodness-of-fit measures primarily reflect the physical ages of test faces, rather than the impact of adaptation. When data are re-expressed as aftereffects and fit with a nonlinear "locally repulsive" model, this model performs equal to or better than a linear model in all adaptation conditions. Data in O'Neil et al. do not provide strong evidence for either re-normalisation or local repulsion in facial age aftereffects, but are more consistent with local repulsion (and exemplar-based encoding of facial age), contrary to the original report.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Storrs, K. R. (2015). Facial age aftereffects provide some evidence for local repulsion (but none for re-normalisation). I-Perception, 6(2), 100–103. https://doi.org/10.1068/i0725jc

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free