Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Controlling interstimulus perceptual variance does not abolish N170 face sensitivity

Nature Neuroscience volume 10, pages 801–802 (2007)Cite this article

To the editor:

In addition to their factual error, they failed to note the striking contradiction between their hypothesis and the existing literature. Most notable are the larger N170 for inverted than for upright faces2,4, the larger N170 for upright than for inverted Mooney faces, which when inverted are perceived as meaningless objects5, the large modulations of N170 amplitude to faces induced by increasing visual expertise with nonface objects6, and the emergence of N170 after conceptual priming of participants' awareness to the physiognomic value of stimuli, which were identical before and after priming7. All these modulations of N170 are robust despite identical stimuli in different conditions, hence identical ISPV.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: ISPV does not account for N170 face sensitivity.

References

  1. Bentin, S., McCarthy, G., Perez, E., Puce, A. & Allison, T. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 8, 551–565 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Rossion, B. et al. Neuroreport 11, 69–74 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Thierry, G., Martin, C.D., Downing, P. & Pegna, A.J. Nat. Neurosci. 10, 505–511 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Itier, R.J., Latinus, M. & Taylor, M.J. Neuroimage 29, 667–676 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Latinus, M. & Taylor, M.J. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 17, 1316–1327 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rossion, B., Kung, C.-C. & Tarr, M.J. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 14521–14526 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bentin, S., Sagiv, N., Mecklinger, A., Friederici, A. & von Cramon, D.Y. Psychol. Sci. 13, 190–193 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Rousselet, G.A., Husk, J.S., Bennett, P. & Sekuler, A. Neuroimage, published online 23 March 2007 (doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.052).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Allison, T. et al. J. Neurophysiol. 71, 821–825 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Schyns, P.G., Jentzsch, I., Johnson, M., Schweinberger, S.R. & Gosselin, F. Neuroreport 14, 1665–1669 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Zion-Golumbic, E. & Bentin, S. Cereb Cortex, published online 24 October 2006 (doi:10.1093/cercor/bhl100).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, Jerusalem, 91905, Israel

    Shlomo Bentin

  2. Diagnostic Imaging, Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, M5G 1X8, Ontario, Canada

    Margot J Taylor

  3. Department of Psychology, Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging, University of Glasgow, 58 Hillhead Street, Glasgow, G12 8QB, UK

    Guillaume A Rousselet, Roberto Caldara & Philippe G Schyns

  4. Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care, The Rotman Research Institute, 3560 Bathurst Street, Toronto, M6A 2E1, Ontario, Canada

    Roxane J Itier

  5. Psychology and Neurophysiology, Université Catholique de Louvain, 10 Place Cardinal Mercier, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1348, Belgium

    Corentin Jacques & Bruno Rossion

Authors
  1. Shlomo Bentin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Margot J Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guillaume A Rousselet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roxane J Itier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Roberto Caldara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Philippe G Schyns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Corentin Jacques
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Bruno Rossion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shlomo Bentin.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Fig. 1

Larger N170 to faces than to cars despite equal ISPV. (PDF 58 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 2

The N170 effect is posterior-lateral distributed and independent of ISPV. (PDF 58 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 3

Face-sensitive global field power in the N170 time range is independent of ISPV. (PDF 219 kb)

Supplementary Fig. 4

Self-contradictions in Thierry et al. (PDF 85 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bentin, S., Taylor, M., Rousselet, G. et al. Controlling interstimulus perceptual variance does not abolish N170 face sensitivity. Nat Neurosci 10, 801–802 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/nn0707-801

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nn0707-801

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing