{"id":{"repo_id":"unr","oai_identifier":"oai:scholarwolf.unr.edu:11714/7931"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/unr/oai:scholarwolf.unr.edu:11714/7931","repository":{"repo_id":"unr","name":"University of Nevada - Reno","base_url":"https://scholarwolf.unr.edu/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"On the insufficiency of laterality-based accounts of face perception and corresponding visual field asymmetries","abstract":"It has been known for nearly a century that the left half of a face is better recognized than the right half (Wolff, 1933). This left half-face advantage is commonly thought to reflect a combination of right hemisphere (RH) superiority for face recognition and a contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence between the RH and the left visual field (LVF). The purpose of this set of experiments was to determine whether RH superiority for faces and contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence is sufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage. We set out four aims to accomplish this: (1) Use behavioral and fMRI methods to demonstrate the LVF half-face advantage and identify its neural basis in ventral occipital-temporal cortex (VOTC); (2) use behavioral methods to show that RH superiority is insufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage; (3) use behavioral methods to show that we perceive only one half of a face at a time; and (4), albeit not initially proposed, use methods developed to accomplish aims 1-3 to distinguish retinotopic face representation from face-centered representation.In our first set of experiments (behavioral and fMRI), we identified for the first time a neural LVF half-face bias in RH face-selective cortex. We also found that the neural LVF bias in right FFA underlies the relationship between FFA laterality and the LVF half-face advantage. This revealed an explicit neural mechanism to describe the commonly assumed basis of the LVF advantage for centrally-viewed faces. In our next set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed the second aim, and found that LVF half-face advantage is contingent upon the simultaneous presence of both an upright LVF and RVF half-face, and does not reflect inherently superior processing of LVF over RVF half-face information. This challenged the sufficiency of the mechanism we discovered in Aim 1 as an explanation of the LVF half-face advantage. In our next set of behavioral experiments (which addressed our third aim) we found that half-face identities compete for limited processing resources, and only one identity can be processed at a time. Furthermore, we found that this does not apply to faces in which half-face identities are similar enough to be perceived as a normal (i.e. non-chimeric) face. In our final set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed our additional Aim 4, and found that the LVF half-face advantage occurs regardless of the location of the face in the visual field. This suggests that faces are represented to some degree in an object-centered reference frame, and the LVF half-face bias reflects a bias to the left half of a face, rather than a retinotopic bias to the left half of visual space.","abstract_html":"It has been known for nearly a century that the left half of a face is better recognized than the right half (Wolff, 1933). This left half-face advantage is commonly thought to reflect a combination of right hemisphere (RH) superiority for face recognition and a contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence between the RH and the left visual field (LVF). The purpose of this set of experiments was to determine whether RH superiority for faces and contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence is sufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage. We set out four aims to accomplish this: (1) Use behavioral and fMRI methods to demonstrate the LVF half-face advantage and identify its neural basis in ventral occipital-temporal cortex (VOTC); (2) use behavioral methods to show that RH superiority is insufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage; (3) use behavioral methods to show that we perceive only one half of a face at a time; and (4), albeit not initially proposed, use methods developed to accomplish aims 1-3 to distinguish retinotopic face representation from face-centered representation.In our first set of experiments (behavioral and fMRI), we identified for the first time a neural LVF half-face bias in RH face-selective cortex. We also found that the neural LVF bias in right FFA underlies the relationship between FFA laterality and the LVF half-face advantage. This revealed an explicit neural mechanism to describe the commonly assumed basis of the LVF advantage for centrally-viewed faces. In our next set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed the second aim, and found that LVF half-face advantage is contingent upon the simultaneous presence of both an upright LVF and RVF half-face, and does not reflect inherently superior processing of LVF over RVF half-face information. This challenged the sufficiency of the mechanism we discovered in Aim 1 as an explanation of the LVF half-face advantage. In our next set of behavioral experiments (which addressed our third aim) we found that half-face identities compete for limited processing resources, and only one identity can be processed at a time. Furthermore, we found that this does not apply to faces in which half-face identities are similar enough to be perceived as a normal (i.e. non-chimeric) face. In our final set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed our additional Aim 4, and found that the LVF half-face advantage occurs regardless of the location of the face in the visual field. This suggests that faces are represented to some degree in an object-centered reference frame, and the LVF half-face bias reflects a bias to the left half of a face, rather than a retinotopic bias to the left half of visual space.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Harrison, Matthew T"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":"Doctorate Degree","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Strother, Lars"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":["Webster, Michael","Caplovitz, Gideon","MacNeilage, Paul","Feil-Seifer, David"],"year":2021,"date_issued":"2021","date_published":"2021","updated_at":"2026-07-27T21:45:57Z","subjects":["Cerebral laterality","Contralateral bias","Face recognition","Left visual field advantage","Right hemisphere superiority"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/11714/7931","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Strother, Lars"]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Webster, Michael","Caplovitz, Gideon","MacNeilage, Paul","Feil-Seifer, David"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Harrison, Matthew T"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2021-09-16T19:07:18Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2021-09-16T19:07:18Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2021"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Doctorate Degree"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Cerebral laterality","Contralateral bias","Face recognition","Left visual field advantage","Right hemisphere superiority"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/11714/7931"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["It has been known for nearly a century that the left half of a face is better recognized than the right half (Wolff, 1933). This left half-face advantage is commonly thought to reflect a combination of right hemisphere (RH) superiority for face recognition and a contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence between the RH and the left visual field (LVF). The purpose of this set of experiments was to determine whether RH superiority for faces and contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence is sufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage. We set out four aims to accomplish this: (1) Use behavioral and fMRI methods to demonstrate the LVF half-face advantage and identify its neural basis in ventral occipital-temporal cortex (VOTC); (2) use behavioral methods to show that RH superiority is insufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage; (3) use behavioral methods to show that we perceive only one half of a face at a time; and (4), albeit not initially proposed, use methods developed to accomplish aims 1-3 to distinguish retinotopic face representation from face-centered representation.In our first set of experiments (behavioral and fMRI), we identified for the first time a neural LVF half-face bias in RH face-selective cortex. We also found that the neural LVF bias in right FFA underlies the relationship between FFA laterality and the LVF half-face advantage. This revealed an explicit neural mechanism to describe the commonly assumed basis of the LVF advantage for centrally-viewed faces. In our next set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed the second aim, and found that LVF half-face advantage is contingent upon the simultaneous presence of both an upright LVF and RVF half-face, and does not reflect inherently superior processing of LVF over RVF half-face information. This challenged the sufficiency of the mechanism we discovered in Aim 1 as an explanation of the LVF half-face advantage. In our next set of behavioral experiments (which addressed our third aim) we found that half-face identities compete for limited processing resources, and only one identity can be processed at a time. Furthermore, we found that this does not apply to faces in which half-face identities are similar enough to be perceived as a normal (i.e. non-chimeric) face. In our final set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed our additional Aim 4, and found that the LVF half-face advantage occurs regardless of the location of the face in the visual field. This suggests that faces are represented to some degree in an object-centered reference frame, and the LVF half-face bias reflects a bias to the left half of a face, rather than a retinotopic bias to the left half of visual space."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["PDF"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["On the insufficiency of laterality-based accounts of face perception and corresponding visual field asymmetries"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Strother, Lars"],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Webster, Michael","Caplovitz, Gideon","MacNeilage, Paul","Feil-Seifer, David"],"dc:creator":["Harrison, Matthew T"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2021-09-16T19:07:18Z"],"dc:date.available":["2021-09-16T19:07:18Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2021"],"dc:description.abstract":["It has been known for nearly a century that the left half of a face is better recognized than the right half (Wolff, 1933). This left half-face advantage is commonly thought to reflect a combination of right hemisphere (RH) superiority for face recognition and a contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence between the RH and the left visual field (LVF). The purpose of this set of experiments was to determine whether RH superiority for faces and contralateral hemifield-hemisphere correspondence is sufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage. We set out four aims to accomplish this: (1) Use behavioral and fMRI methods to demonstrate the LVF half-face advantage and identify its neural basis in ventral occipital-temporal cortex (VOTC); (2) use behavioral methods to show that RH superiority is insufficient to explain the LVF half-face advantage; (3) use behavioral methods to show that we perceive only one half of a face at a time; and (4), albeit not initially proposed, use methods developed to accomplish aims 1-3 to distinguish retinotopic face representation from face-centered representation.In our first set of experiments (behavioral and fMRI), we identified for the first time a neural LVF half-face bias in RH face-selective cortex. We also found that the neural LVF bias in right FFA underlies the relationship between FFA laterality and the LVF half-face advantage. This revealed an explicit neural mechanism to describe the commonly assumed basis of the LVF advantage for centrally-viewed faces. In our next set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed the second aim, and found that LVF half-face advantage is contingent upon the simultaneous presence of both an upright LVF and RVF half-face, and does not reflect inherently superior processing of LVF over RVF half-face information. This challenged the sufficiency of the mechanism we discovered in Aim 1 as an explanation of the LVF half-face advantage. In our next set of behavioral experiments (which addressed our third aim) we found that half-face identities compete for limited processing resources, and only one identity can be processed at a time. Furthermore, we found that this does not apply to faces in which half-face identities are similar enough to be perceived as a normal (i.e. non-chimeric) face. In our final set of experiments (behavioral) we addressed our additional Aim 4, and found that the LVF half-face advantage occurs regardless of the location of the face in the visual field. This suggests that faces are represented to some degree in an object-centered reference frame, and the LVF half-face bias reflects a bias to the left half of a face, rather than a retinotopic bias to the left half of visual space."],"dc:format":["PDF"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/11714/7931"],"dc:subject":["Cerebral laterality","Contralateral bias","Face recognition","Left visual field advantage","Right hemisphere superiority"],"dc:title":["On the insufficiency of laterality-based accounts of face perception and corresponding visual field asymmetries"],"dc:type":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_level":["Doctorate Degree"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T21:45:57Z"}