Do I Have My Attention? Speed of Processing Advantages for the Self-Face Are Not Driven by Automatic Attention Capture

We respond more quickly to our own face than to other faces, but there is debate over whether this is connected to attention-grabbing properties of the self-face. In two experiments, we investigate whether the self-face selectively captures attention, and the attentional conditions under which this might occur. In both experiments, we examined whether different types of face (self, friend, stranger) provide differential levels of distraction when processing self, friend and stranger names. In Experiment 1, an image of a distractor face appeared centrally – inside the focus of attention – behind a target name, with the faces either upright or inverted. In Experiment 2, distractor faces appeared peripherally – outside the focus of attention – in the left or right visual field, or bilaterally. In both experiments, self-name recognition was faster than other name recognition, suggesting a self-referential processing advantage. The presence of the self-face did not cause more distraction in the naming task compared to other types of face, either when presented inside (Experiment 1) or outside (Experiment 2) the focus of attention. Distractor faces had different effects across the two experiments: when presented inside the focus of attention (Experiment 1), self and friend images facilitated self and friend naming, respectively. This was not true for stranger stimuli, suggesting that faces must be robustly represented to facilitate name recognition. When presented outside the focus of attention (Experiment 2), no facilitation occurred. Instead, we report an interesting distraction effect caused by friend faces when processing strangers’ names. We interpret this as a “social importance” effect, whereby we may be tuned to pick out and pay attention to familiar friend faces in a crowd. We conclude that any speed of processing advantages observed in the self-face processing literature are not driven by automatic attention capture

Response times to the self-name, friend’s name and stranger’s name in Experiment 2.

<p>Mean response times to recognise the self-name (red) a friend’s name (blue) and a stranger’s name (green) in Experiment 2.</p

Influence of centrally presented task-irrelevant distractor faces on speed of name recognition.

<p>Mean response times to recognise the self-name (panel A) a friend’s name (panel B) and a stranger’s name (panel C) when the self-face (red), friend face (blue) and stranger face (green) was presented centrally as a distractor (Experiment 1).</p

Example of an upright stimulus from Experiment 1.

<p>Example of an upright stimulus from Experiment 1.</p

Data Experiment 2

<p>IVs are Distractor Face (Friend, Self, Unfamiliar), Target Name (Friend, Self, Unfamiliar) and Visual Field Presentation (Bilateral, LVF, RVF). All IVs are repeated-measures. The DV is reaction time (RT) for correct responses, measured in ms.</p> <p>Incorrect responses accounted for 10.6% of the data, and were removed prior to analysis (i.e. data presented here are for correct responses). For each participant, RT’s more than two standard deviations away from that participant’s mean were removed as outliers; these accounted for 14.2% of trials. Data presented here do not include these trials.</p> <p>Variables are labelled as follows:</p> <p>Distractor Face</p> <p>F = Friend</p> <p>S = Self</p> <p>U = Unfamiliar</p> <p>Target Name</p> <p>F = Friend</p> <p>S = Self</p> <p>U = Unfamiliar</p> <p>Visual Field Presentation</p> <p>B = Bilateral</p> <p>L = LVF</p> <p>R = RVF</p> <p>For example, the variable labelled “FSL” contains the average reaction time to respond a name when the Distractor Face presented was of a Friend, the Target Name to be responded to was the participant’s own name and the distractor image was displayed in the LVF.</p

Data Experiment 1

<p>IVs are Orientation (Upright, Inverted), Target Name (Friend, Self, Unfamiliar) and Distractor Face (Friend, Self, Unfamiliar). All IVs are repeated-measures. The DV is reaction time (RT) for correct responses, measured in ms.</p> <p>Incorrect responses accounted for 5.2% of the data, and were removed prior to analysis (i.e. data presented here are for correct responses). For each participant, RT’s more than two standard deviations away from that participant’s mean were removed as outliers; these accounted for 10.3% of trials. Data presented here do not include these trials.</p> <p>Variables are labelled as follows:</p> <p>Orientation</p> <p>I = Inverted</p> <p>Up = Upright</p> <p>Target Name</p> <p>F = Friend</p> <p>S = Self</p> <p>U = Unfamiliar</p> <p>Distractor Face</p> <p>F = Friend</p> <p>S = Self</p> <p>U = Unfamiliar</p> <p>For example, the variable labelled “ISF” contains the average reaction time to respond a name when the Distractor Face was presented in an Inverted Orientation, when the Target Name to respond to was the participant’s own name, and when the Distractor Face was an image of a Friend.</p

Influence of peripherally presented task-irrelevant distractor faces on speed of name recognition.

<p>Mean response times to recognise the self-name, a friend’s name and a stranger’s name in the peripherally presented presence of the self-face (red line), a friend’s face (blue line) and a stranger’s face (green line).</p