Location of Repository

Investigating the Features of the M170 in Congenital Prosopagnosia

By Davide Rivolta, Romina Palermo, Laura Schmalzl and Mark A. Williams


Face perception generates specific neural activity as early as 170 ms post-stimulus onset, termed the M170 when measured with Magnetoencephalography (MEG). We examined the M170 in six people with congenital prosopagnosia (CP) and 11 typical controls. Previous research indicates that there are two neural generators for the M170 (one within the right lateral occipital area – rLO and one within the right fusiform gyrus – rFG), and in the current study we explored whether these sources reflect the processing of different types of information. Individuals with CP showed face-selective M170 responses within the rLO and right rFG, which did not differ in magnitude to those of the controls. To examine possible links between neural activity and behavior we correlated the CPs’ MEG activity generated within rLO and rFG with their face perception skills. The rLO-M170 correlated with holistic/configural face processing, whereas the rFG-M170 correlated with featural processing. Hence, the results of our study demonstrate that individuals with CP can show an M170 that is within the normal range, and that the M170 in the rLO and rFG are involved in different aspects of face processing

Topics: Neuroscience
Publisher: Frontiers Research Foundation
OAI identifier: oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:3298857
Provided by: PubMed Central
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.g... (external link)
  • Suggested articles



    1. (2009). A face feature spaceinthemacaquetemporallobe.
    2. (2012). An early category-specific neural response for the perception of both places and faces.
    3. (2000). analysis: I. Segmentation and surface reconstruction.
    4. (2008). Are faces special? A case of pure prosopagnosia.
    5. (2006). are impaired in developmental prosopagnosia?
    6. B.(1992).Functionalneuroanatomy of face and object processing.
    7. (1993). BORB: The Birmingham Object Recognition Battery.H o v e , UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    8. (2004). Brain potentials reflect residual face processing in a case of prosopagnosia.
    9. C.(1987).Configurationalinformation in face perception.
    10. Citation: Rivolta D,Palermo R,Schmalzl L and Williams MA (2012) Investigating the features of the M170 in congenital prosopagnosia.
    11. (2008). Cognitive heterogeneity in genetically based prosopagnosia: a family study.
    12. (2002). Configural face processing develops more slowly than featural processing.
    13. (2005). Congenital prosopagnosia: faceblind from birth.
    14. (2008). Constraining the cortical face network by neuroimaging studies of acquired prosopagnosia.
    15. (1999). Cortical surface-based analysis: II. Inflation, flattering, and surface-based coordinate system.
    16. (2012). Covert face recognition in congenital prosopagnosia: a group study.
    17. (2009). Defining the face processing network: optimization of the functional localizer in fMRI.
    18. (2000). Developmental prosopagnosia with normal configural processing.
    19. (2006). Developmental prosopagnosia: a window to content-specific face processing.
    20. (2003). Developmental prosopagnosia: ar e v i e w .Behav.
    21. (2009). Diagnosing prosopagnosia: effects of aging, sex, and participant-stimulus ethnic matchontheCambridgeFaceMemory Test and Cambridge Face PerceptionTest.Cogn.Neuropsychol.26,
    22. (2010). Discrimination of facial features by adults, 10-year-olds, and cataract-reversalpatients.Perception 39,
    23. (2000). Dynamic statistical parametric mapping: combining fMRI and MEG for high-resolution imaging of cortical activity.
    24. (2011). Early (N170/M170) face-sensitivity despite right lateral occipital brain damage in acquired prosopagnosia.
    25. (2007). Early face processing specificity: it’s in the eyes!
    26. (1996). Electrophysiological studies of face perception in humans.
    27. (2011). Erroneous analyses of interactions in neuroscience: a problem of significance.
    28. (2000). Event-related brain potentials distinguish processing stages involved in face perception and recognition.
    29. (2007). Event-related potentials reflect heterogeneity of developmental prosopagnosia.
    30. (2002). Eventrelated brain potential evidence for a response of inferior temporal cortex to familiar face repetitions.
    31. (1997). Evidence for rapid face recognition from human scalp and intracranial electrodes.
    32. (2010). Face and object recognition: how do they differ?”
    33. (2004). Face perception: domain specific, not process specific.
    34. (1998). Face-selective processing in human extrastriate cortex around 120 ms after stimulus onset revealedbymagneto-andelectroencephalography.
    35. (2006). Faces are represented holistically in the human occipito-temporal cortex.
    36. (2007). Family resemblance: ten family members withprosopagnosiaandwithin-class object agnosia.
    37. (2012). Frontiers in Human Neuroscience www.frontiersin.org
    38. (2002). Functional Acuity Contrast Test (FACT).
    39. (2007). Functional plasticity in ventral temporal cortex following cognitive rehabilitation of a congenital prosopagnosic.J.Cogn.Neurosci.19,
    40. (2011). Holistic face categorization in higher order visual areas of the normal and prosopagnosic brain: toward a nonhierarchical view of face perception.
    41. (2011). Impaired holistic coding of facial expression and facial identity in congenital prosopagnosia.Neuropsychologia49,
    42. (2002). Impaired visual object recognition and dorsal/ventral stream interaction in schizophrenia.
    43. (1994). Interpreting magnetic fields of the brain – minimum norm estimates.
    44. (2006). Inversion and contrastreversal effects on face processing assessed by MEG. Brain Res. 1115, 108–120. Kanwisher,N.(2010).Functionalspecificity in the human brain: a window into the functional architecture of the mind.
    45. (2002). Lesions of the fusiform face area impair perception of facial configuration in prosopagnosia.
    46. (1969). Looking at upsidedown faces.
    47. (1989). model of the human head for interpretation of neuromagnetic data.
    48. (2005). Morphing Marilyn into Maggie dissociates physical and identity face representations in the brain.
    49. (2007). Neuralcorrelatesof processingfacial identity based on features versus their spacing.
    50. (2005). Normal and abnormal face selectivity of the M170 response in developmental prosopagnosics.
    51. (2009). Perception of face parts and face configurations: an fMRI study.
    52. (1997). Race and shape repetition effects in humans: a spatio-temporal ERP study.
    53. (2008). Rapid adaptation of the M170 response: importance of face parts.
    54. (2009). Reduced structural connectivity in ventral visual cortex in congenital prosopagnosia.
    55. (2010). Response profile of the facesensitive N170 component: a rapid adaptation study.
    56. (2007). Role of features and second-order relations in face discrimination, face recognition, and individual face skills: behavioural and fMRI data.
    57. (1999). Selective visual streaming in face recognition: evidence from developmental prosopagnosia.
    58. (2010). Semantic informationcanfacilitatecovertface recognition in congenital prosopagnosia.
    59. (2007). sources of the 170-ms response to facesareco-localizedinthefusiform gyrus.
    60. (2006). Specialized face perception mechanisms extract both part and spacing information: evidence from developmental prosopagnosia.
    61. (2010). Specificity of impaired facial identity recognition in children with suspected developmental prosopagnosia.
    62. (2007). Structural imaging reveals anatomical alterations in inferotemporal cortex in congenital prosopagnosia.
    63. (2008). Structure and function in acquired prosopagnosia: lessons from a series of 10 patients with brain damage.
    64. (2007). SuperLab Pro 4.0.7b [Computer Program].S a n Pedro,
    65. (2006). Test: results for neurologically intact individuals and an investigation of its validity using inverted face stimuli and prosopagnosic participants.
    66. (2001). The autism-spectrum quotient (AQ): evidence from Asperger syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians.
    67. (2000). The distributed human neural system for face perception.
    68. (2008). The effects of parts, wholes, and familiarity on face-selective responses in MEG.
    69. (2000). The face-specific N170 component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces.
    70. (1997). The fusiform face area: a module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception.
    71. (2002). The many faces of configural processing.
    72. (2005). The neural basis of the behavioral face-inversion effect.
    73. (2011). The neuroanatomic basis of the faceselectiveN170inacquiredprosopagnosia, a combined ERP/fMRI study.
    74. (2011). The role of lateral occipital face and object areas in the face inversion effect.
    75. (2000). The selectivityof theoccipitotemporalM170for faces.
    76. (2003). The spatiotemporal dynamics of the face inversion effect: a magnetoand electro-encephalographic study.
    77. (2010). Three cases of developmental prosopagnosia from one family:detailed neuropsychological and psychophysical investigationoffaceprocessing.Cortex 46,
    78. (2007). TMS evidence for the involvement of the right occipital face area in early face processing.
    79. (2007). Too many trees to see the forest: performance, event-related potential, and functional magnetic resonance imaging manifestations of integrative congenital prosopagnosia.
    80. (2008). What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI.
    81. (2009). Why does picture-plane inversion sometimes dissociate perception of featuresandspacinginfaces,andsometimes not? Toward a new theory of holistic processing.

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.