The interest surround the N170 Stimulus

Introduction:

Recently researches have shown an addition involvement in the research of ‘N170 ‘ . In recent old ages the researches has been observed that the ‘N170 ‘ gives response to a lateralized face stimulation in massively reduced amplitude, while topics are concentrating a cardinal face image, instead than concentrating a non-face stimulation matched for low degree ocular belongingss. Recent developments found that ‘N170 ‘ is sensitive to confront perceptual experience. To day of the month there are figure contradictory findings are established on ‘N170 ‘ face particular, because of assorted recent findings shows that there are some other factors and temporal countries besides get activated for the face stimulation. So far, nevertheless, there has been small treatment about the ‘N170-Contradictory ‘ statements and researches. This essay critically discusses the recent findings and the contradictions about ‘N170 ‘ face perceptual experience.

Discussion:

What is ‘N170 ‘ ?– The ‘N170 ‘ is the first posterior negative warp following the ocular presentation of a image of a face, top outing at occipito-temporal sites at around 170 MS ( Bentin, Allison, Puce, Perez, & A ; McCarthy, 1996 ; Bo? tzel, Schulze, & A ; Stodieck, 1995 ) . Bentin et Al. ( 1996 ) characterized the response belongingss of the ‘N170 ‘ utilizing a mark sensing undertaking in which assorted images of faces and other objects ( e.g. flowers, autos ) were presented and topics were monitored for the visual aspect of butterflies ( mark ) in the sequence. In that early survey, the ‘N170 ‘ response was little or described as absent for non-face stimulations as the negative warp did non traverse the zero baseline degree of the EEG. Since so, several ERP surveies have indicates big and clear negative ‘N170 ‘ constituents following the presentation of faces every bit good as non-face objects ( e.g. Curran, Tanaka, & A ; Weiskopf, in imperativeness ; De Haan, Pascalis, & A ; Johnson, 2002 ; Eimer, 2000a, B ; Rossion, Gauthier, Goffaux, Tarr, & A ; Crommelinck, 2002 ; Rossion et al. , 2000 ; Tanaka & A ; Curran, 2001 ; Taylor, McCarthy, Saliba, & A ; Degiovanni, 1999 ) .

For the past few decennaries there are figure of surveies found that there is a decrease in the amplitude of ‘N170 ‘ while face presented as stimulation. Guillaume Thierry1, ( 2007 ) , proceeded with an Event-related potency ( ERP ) probes have led to the consensus that faces selectively elicit a negative moving ridge top outing 170 MS after presentation, the ‘N170 ‘ . In such experiments, nevertheless, faces are about ever presented from a full forepart position ; whereas other stimulations are more perceptually variable, taking to uncontrolled inter stimulation perceptual discrepancy ( ISPV ) . Here, we compared ERPs induced by faces, autos and butterflies while-for the first time-controlling ISPV ( low or high ) . Surprisingly, the ‘N170 ‘ was sensitive, non to object class, but to ISPV. In add-on, we found category effects independent of ISPV 70 MS earlier than has been by and large reported. ( Guillaume Thierry1, 2007 )

Further, researches show that relative to standard faces, the ‘N170 ‘ induced by upside-down faces was delayed. This latency displacement caused by face inversion replicates old terminations and is most likely due to inadequate configurable information provided by inverted faces. ( Eimer, 2000 ) Based on this thought, the internal characteristic and the external characteristic remotion even resulted in ‘N170 ‘ latency displacements. While a little but dependable ‘N170 ‘ hold was measured in response to faces without internal characteristics, the hold produced by the absence of external characteristics was tantamount to the hold ensuing from face inversion. ( Eimer, 2000 )

Further more, the face-specific ‘N170 ‘ is activated by encephalon procedures related to the structural processing of faces. These procedures are non simply responsible for caput sensing, or for the processing of outstanding internal face visual aspects. Alternatively, they seem to be devoted to the configurationally analysis of whole faces ( Eimer, 2000 ) . The ‘N170 ‘ is activated to the upper limit for face stimulation which are suited for face acknowledgment and designation ( front and profile positions, both internal and external characteristics present ) ( Eimer, 2000 ) . Other types of faces trigger an attenuated ‘N170 ‘ and this fading is a map of the grade to which these stimulations differ from ‘optimal ‘ faces ( Eimer, 2000 ) . This response suggests that the ‘N170 ‘ is linked with late phases of structural encryption, where representations of planetary face constellations are generated in order to be utilized by subsequent face acknowledgment and designation procedures. ( Eimer, 2000 )

In add-on, there are several experiments have suggested that portion of these early ‘N170 ‘ differences between faces and objects can be explained by factors that are non-specific to faces per Se such as our ocular expertness at categorising certain sorts of objects automatically at the single degree ( Rossion, Curran & A ; Gauthier, 2002 ) . For case, the hold of the ‘N170 ‘ with inversion can be observed on fresh objects following expertness preparation ( Rossion et al. , 2002 ) or for extremely familiar stimulations such as missive strings ( Rossion et al. , 2003a ) . We have besides shown that the larger amplitude of the ‘N170 ‘ to faces, every bit good as the specific effects with inversion ; disappear when low-spatial frequences are filtered out of the stimulation, but non when high-spatial frequences are filtered out ( Goffaux, Gauthier & A ; Rossion, 2003a ) .

In a recent survey, Bentin et Al. ( 1996 ) argued that the ‘N170 ‘ should reflect the activation of a cortical part involved in human eyes sensing, as the amplitude of the ‘N170 ‘ was peculiarly big for eyes presented in isolation in this latter survey. The amplitude of the ‘N170 ‘ was besides found to be as big for deformed faces as for stray eyes but significantly lower for whole faces ( Bentin et al. , 1996 ) . This reading of a human-eye-sensitive sensor has, nevertheless, been ruled out by a recent survey ( Eimer, 1998 ) as the ‘N170 ‘ amplitude was non affected by the presence or absence of eyes. Rather, it was besides suggested that the ‘N170 ‘ was caused by the structural encryption of different face constituents ( Eimer, 1998 ) Bentin et Al. ( 1996 ) besides observed a non-significant tendency for a larger ‘N170’amplitude for upside-down faces every bit compared to normal faces. ( Zion-Golumbic & A ; Bentin, 2007 ) . This research indicates there is batch more farther surveies needed to explicate that ‘N170 ‘ is specific to normal faces which are in different dimension or it is specific to the face which presented in full.

A old survey point out the emotional point of position in the face acknowledgment, the ‘N170 ‘ constituent has been related to structural encryption that is utilized for facial designation ( Eimer 2000 ) . The present consequences do non let a definite reply to the inquiry whether the larger ‘N170 ‘ amplitudes reflect enhanced encryption of either individuality or look of the face, or both, and whether this predicts better callback of facial individuality ( see Haxby and others2000 ) . Similar to surveies on the consequence of emotional scene context on object acknowledgment and memory, future surveies of face acknowledgment demand to find how the presence of an emotional context influences encoding and subsequent retrieval ( Erk and others 2003 ; Smith, Dolan, and Rugg 2004 ; Smith, Henson, Dolan, and Rugg 2004 ) .

However, there are figure of surveies provides a base for ‘N170 ‘ is face specific. Hence, there are lot more contradictions turning in the field, like ‘N170 ‘ is non merely the country in encephalon which get activated during face acknowledgment. Not all the researches provide grounds that face acknowledgment is carried out merely by the ‘N170 ‘ country. Numerous researches found that there are some other countries in the encephalon ; even from the temporal part got activated during the face acknowledgment procedure. This shows there is a demand of furthermore research in the field, which provides information that ‘N170 ‘ is the lone country that specific to confront acknowledgment. However, the face inversion consequence found for human but non for monkey faces led deHaan et Al. ( 2002 )

In order to this contradiction between the face constituents and ‘N170 ‘ there is a factor should be noticed farther “ The Face Expertise ” . Behavioral surveies have shown that ocular expertness for a peculiar category of ocular stimulation can bring forth public presentation similar to that observed in face perceptual experience. For illustration, similar to the determination that face acknowledgment is better for right-side up than inverted faces ( the inversion consequence ) , dog show Judgess exhibited worse public presentation in acknowledgment of Canis familiaris images presented and tested upside down than right-side up ( Diamond and Carey, 1986 ) . Likewise, in a series of behavioural surveies conducted by Gauthier and co-workers ( Gauthier and Tarr, 1997,2002 ; Gauthier et al. , 1998 ) , after extended preparation on a fresh young girl of objects called ‘greebles’photorealistically endured 3D objects that all portion a common configuration-observers showed behavioural profiles similar to those obtained with faces. ( Xu, 2005 ) RC & A ; G to reason that “ experience drives the specialisation of the ‘N170 ‘ and that human expertness with human faces does non generalise to faces of apes. ( Bentin & A ; Carmel, 2002 )

In an functional magnetic resonance imaging survey, Gauthier et Al. ( 2000 ) measured responses to auto and bird stimulations in auto and bird experts while these experts carried out an individuality fiting undertaking and a location fiting undertaking.Gauthier et Al. ( 2000 ) observed higher fMRI activation in the right FFA and the right occipital face country ( OFA ) of bird and auto experts sing stimulations within their spheres of expertness than outside their spheres of expertness. Furthermore, it was found that the degree of behavioural expertness significantly correlated with the strength of the fMRI expertness response merely in the right FFA when participants performed the location fiting undertaking. There were, nevertheless, a figure of drawbacks in the fMRI expertness studies.. ( Xu, 2005 ) But still the ulterior surveies conducted by Xu ( 2005 ) was found that survey reported a strong expertness consequence in the right FFA. The consequences are overall consistent with those of Gauthier et Al. ( 2000 ) and suggest the engagement of the right FFA in the processing of non-face expertness ocular stimulation. ( Xu, 2005 ) .This indicates there is presence of expertness which raise a inquiry that the expertness will besides be a factor for face acknowledgment. Even though the expertness have grounds but still that cant prove that ‘N170 ‘ is non face particular, that may supply a inquiry that ‘N170 ‘ is entirely a face specific factor in temporal country or non.

Several agencies of grounds from cognitive psychological science ( Yin, 1969 ; Bruce, 1988 ; Tanaka and Farah, 1993 ) , physiological psychology ( Farah, 1991 ; Moscovitch et al. , 1997 ) , neurophysiology ( Desimone, 1991 ; Perrett et al. , 1992 ) and more late neuro imaging surveies ( Sergent et al. , 1992 ; Kanwisher et al. , 1997 ; Mc-Carthy et al. , 1997 ) back up the thesis of an independent processing system specifically dedicated to faces. A recent functional magnetic resonance imaging survey ( Kanwisher et al. , 1998 ) showed a decreased activation of the ‘face spindle-shaped country ‘ , a right-hemisphere part antecedently described as being face particular ( Kanwisher et al. , 1997 ) , for upside-down faces but the difference between normal and upside-down faces was little and inconsistent across topics. ( Rossion, et al. , 1999 ) Bruyer and Crispeels, 1992 ; Gauthier and Tarr, 1997 ) , it would besides be interesting to prove whether the neurophysiological correlative of the inversion consequence observed in the present survey is specific to faces, or can be observed for other sorts of objects with and without ocular expertness. Such surveies are presently in advancement in our research lab. ( Rossion, et al. , 1999 ) . The research happening provides information that there is an incompatibility in the face specific spindle-shaped country for normal and upside-down object.

In the recent survey which considers all the contradictions it was found that, the ‘N170 ‘ is larger in amplitude when faces are presented comparative to other object classs. This consequence can non be accounted for by a simple factor such as a lower physical discrepancy of face stimulation as compared to other objects. Furthermore, it is improbable that a greater perceptual similarity of face stimulations would even account for significant portion of this phenomenon. ( Rossion & A ; Jacques, 2008 ) . In the survey to simplify, there are largely two ways to account for the larger ‘N170 ‘ to faces than objects as revealed by averaging EEG sections clip locked to stimulus oncoming. Harmonizing to the first traditional position, ERP constituents originate from a monolithic synchronised addition of post-synaptic nervous activity time-locked and phase-locked to stimulation oncoming, superimposed onto background electrophysiological activity unrelated to the stimulation ( the signal noise theoretical account ) . In this model, the larger ‘N170 ‘ to faces could merely reflect a stronger addition of nervous activity as compared to objects, in ocular countries from which this constituent originates. ( Rossion & A ; Jacques, 2008 ) . All the old surveies give us clear notes on the being of the relationship between the ‘N170 ‘ and the face acknowledgment.

Even though the larger ‘N170 ‘ to faces than other classs is due to a fixed addition of power in localised encephalon countries between 130 and 200 MS, the reading of this amplitude difference remains equivocal with regard to the implicit in beginnings, as originally discussed by several writers ( Bentin et al. , 1996 ; Botzel et al. , 1995 ; Jeffreys, 1996 ) . That is, the ‘N170 ‘ due to the add-on of multiple cortical beginnings, i.e. , several sub-components, or to a major/dominant beginning that would be of stronger magnitude for faces than objects? Source localisation surveies of the face ‘N170’/ M170 with assorted methods have given instead incompatible consequences ( e.g. bilateral beginnings in the posterior spindle-shaped gyrus/lateral occipito-temporal composite: Deffke et al. , 2007 ; Henson et al. , 2007 ; Rossion et al. , 2003 ; Schweinberger et al. , 2002 ; in the lateralparts of the temporal cerebral mantle: Shibata et al. , 2002 ; Watanabe et al.,2003 ; in the superior temporal sulcus: Itier and Taylor, 2004b ; in bilateral fusiform convolution, together with multiple activation in a parieto-temporal-occipital web of countries: Herrmann et al.,2005 ) . ( Rossion & A ; Jacques, 2008 )

In contrast some research workers found that, negative potencies at similar latencies are induced by non-face classs, and the amplitudes of these potencies vary well. Harmonizing to RC & A ; G, this form suggests that the ‘N170 ‘ might associate to general classification processes ( e.g. Tanaka, 2001 ) . ‘N170 ‘ additions in amplitude when the undertaking requires classification at the subsidiary, compared with a basic degree ( Tanaka, Loo, Weisbord, & A ; Keifer, 1999 ) . ( Bentin & A ; Carmel, 2002 ) Comparing the encephalon activity induced by faces with that induced by other objects is moot because faces are automatically categorized at the person ( within class ) degree whereas other objects are non. Give the complexness and diverseness of excess striate encephalon parts, it is really likely that the ‘N170 ‘ is modulated by a figure of encephalon beginnings, each involved in a different type of perceptual procedure. ( Bentin & A ; Carmel, 2002 )

RC & A ; G knock our suggestion that domain specificity may account for the absence of198 S. Bentin, D. Carmel / Cognition 85 ( 2002 ) 197-202 undertaking effects on the ‘N170 ‘ induced by faces ( while such effects were found on the ERPs induced by autos at the same latency ) , by doing the undermentioned statements like Faces pull attending automatically ; hence, happening small task-induced transition of the ‘N170 ‘ induced by faces is non relevant to domain specificity. Attentional effects due to task instructions should be interpreted in the context of attentional differences due to the percipient ‘s acquired processing prejudices for a class ( Bentin & A ; Carmel, 2002 ) . In inactive ( oddball ) undertakings, faces and objects of expertness should automatically enroll extra procedures as compared with classs for which the percipient is non adept ( Bentin & A ; Carmel, 2002 ) , Probably we accept the possibility that extended expertness with a peculiar set of stimuli might alter the scheme of treating those stimulations, the present grounds does non connote that this alteration starts at the degree of processing at which the ‘N170 ‘ consequence is modulated. Whether or non the particular efficiency that normal people show for face processing is unconditioned is non clear. ( Bentin & A ; Carmel, 2002 )

In decision, from the old findings and the current surveies it was found that the relationship between ‘N170 ‘ and the face acknowledgments shows more stronger grounds, but still there are lot more inquiries to be answered whether ‘N170 ‘ plays a function in face acknowledgment or non, does it plays function merely for the proper face features and there is demand to happen out that is any external factors like expertness consequence, familiar face consequence are at that place. Present findings and contradictions shows that there are more similar sum of groundss provided to accept that ‘N170 ‘ is face specific and to the contradiction. Even though there are so many contradictions provided but still there are researches traveling on to turn out that. Taking that in history, ‘N170 ‘ is face specific but there are lot more factors has consequence to certain extend. It got activated more to the face stimulation.

Mentions:

Herrmann, M.J. , Ehlis, A.C. , Muehlberger, A. , Fallgatter, A.J. , 2005.Source localisation of early phases of face processing. Brain Topogr. 18,77-85.

Carmel, D. , & A ; Bentin, S. ( 2002 ) . Domain specificity versus expertness: factors act uponing distinguishable processing of faces. Cognition, 83, 1-29.

Botzel, K. , Schulze, S. , Stodieck, S.R.G. , 1995. Scalp topography andanalysis of intracranial beginnings of face-evoked potencies. Exp. Brain Res. 104, 135-143.

Deffke, I. , Sander, T. , Heidenreich, J. , Sommer, W. , Curio, G. , Trahms, L. , Lueschow, A. , 2007. MEG/EEG beginnings of the 170-ms response to faces are co-localized in the fusiform convolution. NeuroImage 35, 1495-1501.

Rossion, B. , Joyce, C.A. , Cottrell, G.W. , Tarr, M.J. , 2003. Early lateralisation and orientation tuning for face, word, and object processing in the ocular cerebral mantle. NeuroImage 20, 1609-1624.

Schweinberger, S.R. , Pickering, E.C. , Jentzsch, I. , Burton, A.M. , Kaufmann, J.M. , 2002. Event-related encephalon possible grounds for a response of inferior temporal cerebral mantle to familiar face repeats. Cogn. Brain Res. 14, 398-409

Baron-Cohen, S. ( 1995 ) . Mindblindness. An essay on autism and theory of head. Cambridge, MA: MITPress.

Baron-Cohen, S. , Wheelwright, S. , & A ; Jolliffe, T. ( 1997 ) . Is at that place a “ linguistic communication of the eyes ” ? Evidence from normal grownups, and grownups with Autism or Asperger syndrome. Ocular Cognition, 4, 311-331.

Bentin, S. , Allison, T. , Puce, A. , Perez, E. , McCarthy, G. , 1996. Electrophysiological surveies of faceperception in worlds. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 8, 551-565.

Bentin, S. , & A ; Carmel, D. ( 2002 ) . Histories for the ‘N170 ‘ face-effect: a answer to Rossion, Curran, & A ; Gauthier. Cognition, 85 ( 2 ) , 197-202.

Campbell, R. , Landis, T. , & A ; Regard, M. ( 1986 ) . Face acknowledgment and lip-reading: A neurological dissociation.Brain, 109, 509-521.

Curran, T. , Tanaka, J. W. , & A ; Weiskopf, D. M. ( in imperativeness ) . An electrophysiological comparing of ocular classification and acknowledgment memory. Cognitive, Affective, & A ; Behavioral Neuroscience.

de Haan, M. , Pascalis, O. , & A ; Johnson, M. J. ( 2002 ) . Specialization of nervous mechanisms underlying face acknowledgment in human babies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 99-209.

Diamond R, Carey S ( 1986 ) Why faces are non particular: an consequence of expertness. J Exp Psychol Gen 115:107 — 117.

Eimer, M. ( 2000 ) . The face-specific ‘N170 ‘ constituent reflects late phases in the structural encryption of faces. [ Cognitive neuroscience. ] . Neuroreport July, 11 ( 10 ) , 2319-2324.

Erk S, Kiefer M, Grothe J, Wunderlich A, Spitzer M, Walter H. 2003. Emotional context modulates subsequent memory consequence. Neuroimage18:439 — 447.

Gauthier I, Skudlarski P, Gore JC, Anderson AW ( 2000 ) Expertness for carsand birds recruits encephalon countries involved in face acknowledgment. Nat Neurosci 3:191 — 197.

Gauthier I, Tarr MJ ( 1997 ) Becoming a ‘greeble ‘ expert: exploring mechanisms for face acknowledgment. Vision Res 37:1673 — 1682.

Gauthier I, Tarr MJ ( 2002 ) Unraveling mechanisms for adept objectrecognition: bridging encephalon activity and behaviour. J Exp Psychol HumPercept Perform 28:431 — 446.

Goffaux, V. , Gauthier, I. , Rossion, B. ( 2003 ) . Spatial scale part to early ocular differences between face and object processing. Cognitive Brain Research, 16, 416-424.

Henson, R.N. , Mattout, J. , Singh, K.D. , Barnes, G.R. , Hillebrand, A. , Friston, K. , 2007. Population-level illations for distributed MEG beginning localization of function under multiple restraints: application to face-evoked Fieldss. NeuroImage 38, 422-438.

Erk S, Kiefer M, Grothe J, Wunderlich A, Spitzer M, Walter H. 2003. Emotional context modulates subsequent memory consequence. Neuroimage18:439 — 447.

Haxby JV, Hoffman EA, Gobbini MI. 2000. The distributed human neuralsystem for face perceptual experience. Trends Cogn Sci 4:223 — 233.

Joyce, C.A. & A ; Rossion, B. ( 2005 ) . The face-sensitive ‘N170 ‘ and VPP constituents manifest the same encephalon procedures: The consequence of mention electrode site. Clinical Neurophysiology, 116, 2613-2631.

Rossion, B. , Delvenne, J. F. , Debatisse, D. , Goffaux, V. , Bruyer, R. , Crommelinck, M. , et Al. ( 1999 ) . Spatio-temporal localisation of the face inversion consequence: an event-related potencies survey. Biol Psychol, 50 ( 3 ) , 173-189.

Rossion, B. , & A ; Jacques, C. ( 2008 ) . Does physical interstimulus discrepancy history for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human encephalon? Ten lessons on the ‘N170 ‘ . Neuroimage, 39 ( 4 ) , 1959-1979.

Rossion, B. , Joyce, C.J. , Cottrell, G.W. , Tarr, M.J. ( 2003 ) . Early lateralisation and orientation tuning for face, word and object processing in the ocular cerebral mantle. Neuroimage, 20, 1609-1624.

Rossion, B. , Gauthier, I. , Tarr, M. J. , Despland, P. A. , Bruyer, R. , Linotte, S. , & A ; Crommelinck, M. ( 2000 ) . The ‘N170 ‘ occipito-temporal constituent is enhanced and delayed to upside-down faces but non to upside-down objects: an electrophysiological history of face-specific procedures in the human encephalon. NeuroReport, 11, 69-74.

Rossion, B. , Curran, T. , Gauthier, I. ( 2002 ) . A defence of the subordinate-level expertness history for the ‘N170 ‘ constituent. Cognition, 85, 189-196.

Rossion, B. & A ; Jacques, C. ( 2008 ) . Does physical interstimulus discrepancy history for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human encephalon? Ten lessons on the ‘N170 ‘ . NeuroImage, 39, 1959-1979.

Rossion, B. , Jacques, C. , Does physical interstimulus discrepancy history for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses inthe human encephalon? Ten lessons on the ‘N170 ‘ , NeuroImage ( 2007 ) , doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.10.011

Tanaka, J. W. , & A ; Curran, T. ( 2001 ) . A nervous footing for adept object acknowledgment. Psychological Science, 12, 43-47.

Taylor, M. J. , McCarthy, G. , Saliba, E. , & A ; Degiovanni, E. ( 1999 ) . ERP grounds of developmental alterations in processing of faces. Clinical Neurophysiology, 110, 910-915.

Smith APR, Dolan RJ, Rugg MD. 2004. Event-related possible correlatives of the retrieval of emotional and nonemotional context. J Cogn Neurosci 16:760 — 775

Bentin, S. , & A ; Carmel, D. ( 2002 ) . Histories for the N170 face-effect: a answer to Rossion, Curran, & A ; Gauthier. Cognition, 85 ( 2 ) , 197-202.

Eimer, M. ( 2000 ) . The face-specific N170 constituent reflects late phases in the structural encryption of faces. [ Cognitive neuroscience. ] . Neuroreport July, 11 ( 10 ) , 2319-2324.

Rossion, B. , Delvenne, J. F. , Debatisse, D. , Goffaux, V. , Bruyer, R. , Crommelinck, M. , et Al. ( 1999 ) . Spatio-temporal localisation of the face inversion consequence: an event-related potencies survey. Biol Psychol, 50 ( 3 ) , 173-189.

Rossion, B. , & A ; Jacques, C. ( 2008 ) . Does physical interstimulus discrepancy history for early electrophysiological face sensitive responses in the human encephalon? Ten lessons on the N170. Neuroimage, 39 ( 4 ) , 1959-1979.

Xu, Y. ( 2005 ) . Revisiting the Role of the Fusiform Face Area in Visual Expertise. Cereb. Cortex, 15 ( 8 ) , 1234-1242.

Zion-Golumbic, E. , & A ; Bentin, S. ( 2007 ) . Dissociated Nervous Mechanisms for Face Detection and Configural Encoding: Evidence from N170 and Induced Gamma-Band Oscillation Effects. Cereb. Cortex, 17 ( 8 ) , 1741-1749.