Title |
Discrimination of human faces by archerfish (Toxotes chatareus)
|
---|---|
Published in |
Scientific Reports, June 2016
|
DOI | 10.1038/srep27523 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Cait Newport, Guy Wallis, Yarema Reshitnyk, Ulrike E. Siebeck |
Abstract |
Two rival theories of how humans recognize faces exist: (i) recognition is innate, relying on specialized neocortical circuitry, and (ii) recognition is a learned expertise, relying on general object recognition pathways. Here, we explore whether animals without a neocortex, can learn to recognize human faces. Human facial recognition has previously been demonstrated for birds, however they are now known to possess neocortex-like structures. Also, with much of the work done in domesticated pigeons, one cannot rule out the possibility that they have developed adaptations for human face recognition. Fish do not appear to possess neocortex-like cells, and given their lack of direct exposure to humans, are unlikely to have evolved any specialized capabilities for human facial recognition. Using a two-alternative forced-choice procedure, we show that archerfish (Toxotes chatareus) can learn to discriminate a large number of human face images (Experiment 1, 44 faces), even after controlling for colour, head-shape and brightness (Experiment 2, 18 faces). This study not only demonstrates that archerfish have impressive pattern discrimination abilities, but also provides evidence that a vertebrate lacking a neocortex and without an evolutionary prerogative to discriminate human faces, can nonetheless do so to a high degree of accuracy. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Japan | 29 | 17% |
United States | 14 | 8% |
United Kingdom | 6 | 4% |
India | 3 | 2% |
France | 3 | 2% |
Singapore | 3 | 2% |
Canada | 3 | 2% |
Australia | 2 | 1% |
Spain | 2 | 1% |
Other | 12 | 7% |
Unknown | 94 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 145 | 85% |
Scientists | 21 | 12% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 2% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
United States | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 132 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 26 | 19% |
Researcher | 25 | 18% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 17% |
Student > Master | 16 | 12% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
Other | 21 | 15% |
Unknown | 20 | 15% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 37 | 27% |
Psychology | 26 | 19% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 7% |
Neuroscience | 10 | 7% |
Environmental Science | 8 | 6% |
Other | 20 | 15% |
Unknown | 26 | 19% |