Compare And Contrast The Theories Of Face Recognition
This essay will compare and contrast the feature analysis theory which is supported by Shepherd, Davis and Ellis (1981), with the Holistic Form Theory which is supported by Bruce and Young (1986). It will first compare the two theories, then the evidence that supports these theories and then finally use Burton’s (1990) IAC model to criticize both theories.The feature analysis theory basically states that we recognise a face by its individual features. This makes it a bottom up theory, as we see the individual features as being more important than the face. We call these FRU’s. FRU’s are Face Recognition Units. An FRU could be the eyes, nose or mouth of a person. We would call these the internal FRU’s. The external FRU’s would include the hair, neck, ears, or jewelry of a person. The theory was introduced with the understanding that someone recognises a face by one single FRU. They found that the most remembered feature on someone’s face is the eyes. Occasionally, somebody had a more significant feature, like a large nose, or prominent teeth. They also found that people you have not met but you have seen (such as a celebrity), external feature are the ones that are most easily recogniseable. Internal features
Nevertheless, the holistic form theory has its criticisms too. However, as not much research has been done, there are no criticisms on the theory itself. However, the linear model cannot be right as occasionally, people meet someone who they recognise and can tell you their names but not where they know them from. If the linear model was correct then this could not be so as person identity comes before name generation. Burton et al(1990) however has an explanation for this. He says that faces are stored in our semantic memory. He states that they are like boxes, with the information and names in with the face. Therefore all the facts about the person are as easily accessible as the name. Burton’s theory is called the interactive activation and competition model (IAC). However, the holistic form theory says, you need the entire face for recognition to occur, and that although you need the FRU’s they are not the only thing that you need to recognise a face. In fact they are only needed in one of 5 stages in face recognition. This makes it a top down theory which means that the face is more important than the individual features when recognizing a face. When we recognise a face as a whole, we call it holistic processing. When you first see a face, you make a template of it in your memory. This template is called a schema. A dictionary definition of a schema is just a diagrammatic representation of the face. When you see the face again, you make a template and search through prior existing ones to see if there is a match. This is called structurally encoding. If there is a match, then you move onto the next stage. Here, your mind tries to fit the relevant FRU’s into the template. If there is an exact match, then again, the next stage, person identification, is activated. In the person identification stage all the information you know about the person is accessed. This would include their job, where you know them from, their interests and whether or not you like them. The last stage to be accessed is the name generation. This is because it is stored separately to the other information. This is called the linear holistic form model. As it is linear each stage must be accessed in order. So, you cannot access a persons name before you have the information on them. As the FRU’s must match the template exactly,
Some topics in this essay:
Global Patterning,
Facial Analysis,
Donald Pennington,
Units FRU,
Form Theory,
Davis Ellis,
,
holistic form,
analysis theory,
feature analysis theory,
facial analysis,
global patterning,
feature analysis,
form theory,
name generation,
internal features,
theories evidence,
holistic form theory,
evidence supports,
Shepherd Davis,
Holistic Form,
Emma Nickson,
1990 iac model,
theories evidence supports,
support holistic form,
Join now to see the rest of the essay!
Approximate Word count = 1588
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)
More Essays on Compare And Contrast The Theories Of Face Recognition Professional Papers: |
CUSTOMER SERVICES
|
|
Saved Papers
You haven't saved any papers.
|