Cited by 40Face Recognition and PerceptionVisual perception and processing mechanismsFace recognition and analysis

Tuning face perception with electrical stimulation of the fusiform gyrus

Open access
Keller, Corey J., Davidesco, Ido, Megevand, Pierre, Lado, Fred A., Malach, Rafael, Mehta, Ashesh D.·2017·Human Brain Mapping

Abstract

The fusiform gyrus (FG) is an important node in the face processing network, but knowledge of its causal role in face perception is currently limited. Recent work demonstrated that high frequency stimulation applied to the FG distorts the perception of faces in human subjects (Parvizi et al. []: J Neurosci 32:14915–14920). However, the timing of this process in the FG relative to stimulus onset and the spatial extent of FG's role in face perception are unknown. Here, we investigate the causal role of the FG in face perception by applying precise, event‐related electrical stimulation (ES) to higher order visual areas including the FG in six human subjects undergoing intracranial monitoring for epilepsy. We compared the effects of single brief (100 μs) electrical pulses to the FG and non‐face‐selective visual areas on the speed and accuracy of detecting distorted faces. Brief ES applied to face‐selective sites did not affect accuracy but significantly increased the reaction time (RT) of detecting face distortions. Importantly, RT was altered only when ES was applied 100ms after visual onset and in face‐selective but not place‐selective sites. Furthermore, ES applied to face‐selective areas decreased the amplitude of visual evoked potentials and high gamma power over this time window. Together, these results suggest that ES of face‐selective regions within a critical time window induces a delay in face perception. These findings support a temporally and spatially specific causal role of face‐selective areas and signify an important link between electrophysiology and behavior in face perception. Hum Brain Mapp 38:2830–2842, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.23543

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Outside the PFC, stimulation of the fusiform gyrus produces distortions of face perception that are almost exclusively tied to ongoing percepts, such as alterations in the facial features of clinical staff.

    “For example, stimulation of the fusiform gyrus produces distortions of face perception, which are almost exclusively tied to ongoing percepts, such as alterations in the facial features of clinical staff (Parvizi et al., 2012;Rangarajan et al., 2014;Keller et al., 2017;Schrouff et al., 2020).”

    From Does the Prefrontal Cortex Play an Essential Role in Consciousness? Insights from Intracranial Electrical Stimulation of the Human Brain (2021) · cites this paper as Keller et al., 2017

    The Discussion (‘Accuracy vs. reaction time’; page unavailable) reports that earlier fusiform-gyrus stimulation studies produced perceptual disruptions of faces. Keller et al.’s own brief-pulse experiment instead found slower detection of distorted face images, without a significant change in accuracy (‘Summary of findings’; page unavailable). Our copy does not support the claim that distortions are almost exclusively tied to ongoing percepts or the example of clinical staff’s facial features. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keller, C. J., Davidesco, I., Megevand, P., Lado, F. A., Malach, R., & Mehta, A. D.
Affiliations
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Department of Neurosurgery Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, and Feinstein Institute for Medical Research Manhasset New York
  • Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
  • Feinstein Institute for Medical Research (US)
Corresponding author
Mehta, Ashesh D.
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-03-27
Volume
38
Issue
6
Pages
2830-2842
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
OpenAlex
W2603394728
Cited by
40
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5
FWCI
2.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Brain Mapping (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (F31NS080357‐01 and T32‐GM007288)
  • Epilepsy Foundation (EFA189045)
  • Swiss National Science Foundation (P3SMP3‐148388)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
Keywords
face perception, fusiform gyrus, electrical stimulation, face-selective areas, reaction time, visual evoked potentials, high-gamma power, intracranial recordings, epilepsy, face processing network
MeSH terms
Facial Recognition, Drug Resistant Epilepsy, Adult, Brain Mapping, Computer Simulation, Electrodes, Implanted, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Photic Stimulation, Reaction Time, Temporal Lobe, Deep Brain Stimulation, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review