ConfusabilityRegions

Identify regions in a morph wheel that are perceptually confusabl

Frozen Effect

Explored whether bodies and objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than those same objects in static form

True Mirror

Determine how depictions (mirrors and technology) of our image influence the representation of sel

Scene Ensembles

The valence of individual scenes are pulled toward the average valence of irrelevant scenes displayed simultaneousl

Ensemble Size Rescaling

Average size accounts for size constanc

Seeing the mean: Ensemble coding for sets of faces.

We frequently encounter groups of similar objects in our visual environment: a bed of flowers, a basket of oranges, a crowd of people. How does the visual system process such redundancy? Research shows that rather than code every element in a texture, the visual system favors a summary statistical representation of all the elements. The authors demonstrate that although it may facilitate texture perception, ensemble coding also occurs for faces—a level of processing well beyond that of textures. Observers viewed sets of faces varying in emotionality (e.g., happy to sad) and assessed the mean emotion of each set. Although observers retained little information about the individual set members, they had a remarkably precise representation of the mean emotion. Observers continued to discriminate the mean emotion accurately even when they viewed sets of 16 faces for 500 ms or less. Modeling revealed that perceiving the average facial expression in groups of faces was not due to noisy representation or noisy discrimination. These findings support the hypothesis that ensemble coding occurs extremely fast at multiple levels of visual analysis

The Frozen Effect: Objects in motion are more aesthetically appealing than objects frozen in time.

Videos of moving faces are more flattering than static images of the same face, a phenomenon dubbed the Frozen Face Effect. This may reflect an aesthetic preference for faces viewed in a more ecological context than still photographs. In the current set of experiments, we sought to determine whether this effect is unique to facial processing, or if motion confers an aesthetic benefit to other stimulus categories as well, such as bodies and objects-that is, a more generalized 'Frozen Effect' (FE). If motion were the critical factor in the FE, we would expect the video of a body or object in motion to be significantly more appealing than when seen in individual, static frames. To examine this, we asked participants to rate sets of videos of bodies and objects in motion along with the still frames constituting each video. Extending the original FFE, we found that participants rated videos as significantly more flattering than each video's corresponding still images, regardless of stimulus domain, suggesting that the FFE generalizes well beyond face perception. Interestingly, the magnitude of the FE increased with the predictability of stimulus movement. Our results suggest that observers prefer bodies and objects in motion over the same information presented in static form, and the more predictable the motion, the stronger the preference. Motion imbues objects and bodies with greater aesthetic appeal, which has implications for how one might choose to portray oneself in various social media platforms

Mixed emotions: Sensitivity to facial variance in a crowd of faces.

The visual system automatically represents summary information from crowds of faces, such as the average expression. This is a useful heuristic insofar as it provides critical information about the state of the world, not simply information about the state of one individual. However, the average alone is not sufficient for making decisions about how to respond to a crowd. The variance or heterogeneity of the crowd--the mixture of emotions--conveys information about the reliability of the average, essential for determining whether the average can be trusted. Despite its importance, the representation of variance within a crowd of faces has yet to be examined. This is addressed here in three experiments. In the first experiment, observers viewed a sample set of faces that varied in emotion, and then adjusted a subsequent set to match the variance of the sample set. To isolate variance as the summary statistic of interest, the average emotion of both sets was random. Results suggested that observers had information regarding crowd variance. The second experiment verified that this was indeed a uniquely high-level phenomenon, as observers were unable to derive the variance of an inverted set of faces as precisely as an upright set of faces. The third experiment replicated and extended the first two experiments using method-of-constant-stimuli. Together, these results show that the visual system is sensitive to emergent information about the emotional heterogeneity, or ambivalence, in crowds of faces