Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Feb 20;33(5):2183-2199.
doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhac201.

The self and a close-other: differences between processing of faces and newly acquired information

Affiliations

The self and a close-other: differences between processing of faces and newly acquired information

Anna Żochowska et al. Cereb Cortex. .

Abstract

Prioritization of self-related information (e.g. self-face) may be driven by its extreme familiarity. Nevertheless, the findings of numerous behavioral studies reported a self-preference for initially unfamiliar information, arbitrarily associated with the self. In the current study, we investigated the neural underpinnings of extremely familiar stimuli (self-face, close-other's face) and stimuli newly assigned to one's own person and to a close-other (abstract shapes). Control conditions consisted of unknown faces and unknown abstract shapes. Reaction times (RTs) to the self-face were shorter than to close-other's and unknown faces, whereas no RTs differences were observed for shapes. P3 amplitude to the self-face was larger than to close-other's and unknown faces. Nonparametric cluster-based permutation tests showed significant clusters for the self-face vs. other (close-other's, unknown) faces. However, in the case of shapes P3 amplitudes to the self-assigned shape and to the shape assigned to a close-other were similar, and both were larger than P3 to unknown shapes. No cluster was detected for the self-assigned shape when compared with the shape assigned to the close-other. Thus, our findings revealed preferential attentional processing of the self-face and the similar allocation of attentional resources to shapes assigned to the self and a close-other.

Keywords: ERP; attention; familiarity; saliency; self-preference.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Shapes used in the present study. The area of each shape was the same and was equal to the area of the face oval.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Schematic presentation of the experimental procedure. Three types of faces (self, close-other’s, unknown) and three types of shapes (self-assigned, assigned to the close-other, unknown) were intermixed and presented pseudo-randomly. Participants were supposed to indicate whether a stimulus was familiar or not. The example image of a self-face is a photograph of one of the co-authors.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
(A) Topographical distribution of brain activity averaged across the two types of stimuli (faces, shape) and across all experimental conditions (self, close-other, unknown) and (B) a butterfly plot presenting grand-average ERPs for all (collapsed) experimental conditions, at all 62 active electrodes.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Behavioral results. (A) Mean (± SD) accuracy scores and (B) mean (± SD) RTs for faces and shapes.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Grand-average ERPs for (A) faces and (B) shapes, pooled for four electrodes: CP1, CPz, CP2, and Pz. The analyzed time window is marked by light-blue rectangles.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
The results of cluster-based permutation tests for faces. (A) Self-face compared to close-other and (B) unknown faces, (C) close-other face compared to unknown faces. Statistically significant positive differences between conditions are indicated in red (P < 0.05).
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
The results of cluster-based permutation tests for shapes. The self-assigned shape compared to the shape assigned to (A) the close-other and (B) unknown shapes, and (C) the shape assigned to the close-other compared to unknown shapes. Statistically significant positive differences between conditions are indicated in red (P < 0.05).

References

    1. Alexopoulos T, Muller D, Ric F, Marendaz C. I, me, mine: automatic attentional capture by self-related stimuli. Eur J Soc Psychol. 2012:42:770–779.
    1. Alzueta E, Melcón M, Jensen O, Capilla A. The ‘Narcissus Effect’: Top-down alpha-beta band modulation of face-related brain areas during self-face processing. NeuroImage. 2020:213:116754. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Apps MA, Tajadura-Jimenez A, Sereno M, Blanke O, Tsakiris M. Plasticity in unimodal and multimodal brain areas reflects multisensory changes in self-face identification. Cereb Cortex. 2015:25:46–55. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aston-Jones G, Cohen JD. An integrative theory of locus coeruleus-norepinephrine function: Adaptive gain and optimal performance. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2005:28:403–450. - PubMed
    1. Beauchamp MS. The social mysteries of the superior temporal sulcus. Trends Cogn Sci. 2015:19:489–490. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types