Visual search efficiency is greater for human faces compared to animal faces

Elizabeth A Simpson, Haley L. Husband, Krysten Yee, Alison Fullerton, Krisztina V. Jakobsen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The Animate Monitoring Hypothesis proposes that humans and animals were the most important categories of visual stimuli for ancestral humans to monitor, as they presented important challenges and opportunities for survival and reproduction; however, it remains unknown whether animal faces are located as efficiently as human faces. We tested this hypothesis by examining whether human, primate, and mammal faces elicit similarly efficient searches, or whether human faces are privileged. In the first three experiments, participants located a target (human, primate, or mammal face) among distractors (non-face objects). We found fixations on human faces were faster and more accurate than fixations on primate faces, even when controlling for search category specificity. A final experiment revealed that, even when task-irrelevant, human faces slowed searches for non-faces, suggesting some bottom-up processing may be responsible for the human face search efficiency advantage.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)439-456
Number of pages18
JournalExperimental Psychology
Volume61
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Primates
Mammals
Visual Search
Human Face
Animals
Reproduction
Survival
Fixation
Experiment
Visual Stimuli
Distractor
Bottom-up
Monitoring
Category Specificity
Monitor

Keywords

  • Animal faces
  • Attention
  • Eye tracking
  • Face detection
  • Human face
  • Search efficiency
  • Visual search

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Psychology(all)
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Visual search efficiency is greater for human faces compared to animal faces. / Simpson, Elizabeth A; Husband, Haley L.; Yee, Krysten; Fullerton, Alison; Jakobsen, Krisztina V.

In: Experimental Psychology, Vol. 61, No. 6, 2014, p. 439-456.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Simpson, Elizabeth A ; Husband, Haley L. ; Yee, Krysten ; Fullerton, Alison ; Jakobsen, Krisztina V. / Visual search efficiency is greater for human faces compared to animal faces. In: Experimental Psychology. 2014 ; Vol. 61, No. 6. pp. 439-456.
@article{d6d9e0c62c474acca886a228da09a655,
title = "Visual search efficiency is greater for human faces compared to animal faces",
abstract = "The Animate Monitoring Hypothesis proposes that humans and animals were the most important categories of visual stimuli for ancestral humans to monitor, as they presented important challenges and opportunities for survival and reproduction; however, it remains unknown whether animal faces are located as efficiently as human faces. We tested this hypothesis by examining whether human, primate, and mammal faces elicit similarly efficient searches, or whether human faces are privileged. In the first three experiments, participants located a target (human, primate, or mammal face) among distractors (non-face objects). We found fixations on human faces were faster and more accurate than fixations on primate faces, even when controlling for search category specificity. A final experiment revealed that, even when task-irrelevant, human faces slowed searches for non-faces, suggesting some bottom-up processing may be responsible for the human face search efficiency advantage.",
keywords = "Animal faces, Attention, Eye tracking, Face detection, Human face, Search efficiency, Visual search",
author = "Simpson, {Elizabeth A} and Husband, {Haley L.} and Krysten Yee and Alison Fullerton and Jakobsen, {Krisztina V.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1027/1618-3169/a000263",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "61",
pages = "439--456",
journal = "Experimental Psychology",
issn = "1618-3169",
publisher = "Hogrefe Publishing",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Visual search efficiency is greater for human faces compared to animal faces

AU - Simpson, Elizabeth A

AU - Husband, Haley L.

AU - Yee, Krysten

AU - Fullerton, Alison

AU - Jakobsen, Krisztina V.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - The Animate Monitoring Hypothesis proposes that humans and animals were the most important categories of visual stimuli for ancestral humans to monitor, as they presented important challenges and opportunities for survival and reproduction; however, it remains unknown whether animal faces are located as efficiently as human faces. We tested this hypothesis by examining whether human, primate, and mammal faces elicit similarly efficient searches, or whether human faces are privileged. In the first three experiments, participants located a target (human, primate, or mammal face) among distractors (non-face objects). We found fixations on human faces were faster and more accurate than fixations on primate faces, even when controlling for search category specificity. A final experiment revealed that, even when task-irrelevant, human faces slowed searches for non-faces, suggesting some bottom-up processing may be responsible for the human face search efficiency advantage.

AB - The Animate Monitoring Hypothesis proposes that humans and animals were the most important categories of visual stimuli for ancestral humans to monitor, as they presented important challenges and opportunities for survival and reproduction; however, it remains unknown whether animal faces are located as efficiently as human faces. We tested this hypothesis by examining whether human, primate, and mammal faces elicit similarly efficient searches, or whether human faces are privileged. In the first three experiments, participants located a target (human, primate, or mammal face) among distractors (non-face objects). We found fixations on human faces were faster and more accurate than fixations on primate faces, even when controlling for search category specificity. A final experiment revealed that, even when task-irrelevant, human faces slowed searches for non-faces, suggesting some bottom-up processing may be responsible for the human face search efficiency advantage.

KW - Animal faces

KW - Attention

KW - Eye tracking

KW - Face detection

KW - Human face

KW - Search efficiency

KW - Visual search

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84916241176&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84916241176&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1027/1618-3169/a000263

DO - 10.1027/1618-3169/a000263

M3 - Article

C2 - 24962122

AN - SCOPUS:84916241176

VL - 61

SP - 439

EP - 456

JO - Experimental Psychology

JF - Experimental Psychology

SN - 1618-3169

IS - 6

ER -