|
|
F |
M |
|
P1 |
N1 |
|
[14] Batty & Taylor (2003) |
26 |
13 |
13 |
P1 larger over the RH but not sensitive to emotions or face-specific. N1 emotion-specific but bilateral. |
Yes (Not face- specific) |
No |
[43] Bentin et al. (1999) |
1 |
- |
1 |
Prosopagnosic patient with right temporal abnormality and not face-sensitive N170. |
|
Yes |
[44] Caldara et al. (2004) |
12 |
6 |
6 |
N1 larger over the RH to both Asian and Caucasian faces. |
- |
Yes (not race-specific) |
[45] Campanella et al. (2000) |
12 |
- |
12 |
Face identity sensitive N170 larger at right posterior/temporal site. |
- |
Yes |
[46] Esslen et al. (2004) |
17 |
10 |
7 |
N170 to neutral faces activates the right fusiform gyrus (LORETA). |
- |
Yes |
[47] George et al. (2005) |
13 |
7 |
6 |
Mooney faces. P1 bilateral not modulated by face inversion. N1 larger on the right hemisphere to both inverted and upright faces. |
No |
Yes (to both inverted and upright faces) |
[48] Gliga et al. (2005) |
10 |
7 |
3 |
N1 larger over the RH to both bodies and faces. |
- |
Yes |
[15] Halgren et al. (2000) |
10 |
2 |
8 |
Overall, laterality greater on the right than the left in fusiform face-selective activity, but a high level of individual variability. |
No |
Yes |
[20] Harris et al. (2005) |
2 |
2 |
- |
2 female prosopagnosic patients. For NM M170 not face-sensitive. Face selectivity effect (faces vs. houses) for KL >LH (RH = 17.3 fT, LH = 26.9 fT). |
- |
No |
[20] Harris et al. (2005) |
3 |
- |
3 |
3 male prosopagnosic patients. For EB and KNL M170 not face-sensitive. Face selectivity effect for ML > RH. (RH = 57.6 fT, LH = 35.6 fT). |
- |
Yes |
[20] Harris et al. (2005) |
17 |
9 |
8 |
M170 larger to faces than houses and tended to be larger at LH (p < 0.08). |
|
No |
[18] Henson et al. (2003) |
18 |
8 |
10 |
Face sensitive N170 was larger at superior temporal area. |
- |
Yes |
[49] Herrmann et al. (2005) |
39 |
19 |
20 |
Bilateral P1 and N1 larger to faces than buildings. |
No |
No |
[50] Holmes et al. (2005) |
14 |
5 |
9 |
Not specifically mentioned. From inspection of Fig. 2. P1 much larger on the RH to both faces and houses. N1 larger on the RH to faces only (unfiltered stimuli). |
Yes (Not face- specific) |
Yes |
[51] Itier & Taylor (2004) |
36 |
18 |
18 |
Face specific P1 was bilateral. N170 was larger over the RH at parietal/occipital sites. |
No |
Yes |
[52] Itier & Taylor (2004) |
16 |
7 |
9 |
N170 to upright faces is bilateral |
- |
No |
[53] Itier & Taylor (2004) |
16 |
7 |
9 |
Face-specific P1 is larger over the RH. N1 was bilateral at occipital sites. It was larger at right parietal sites to objects, inverted faces, and upright faces. |
Yes |
Yes/no (to objects, inverted and upright faces.) |
[21] Jemel et al. (2005) |
15 |
10 |
5 |
No hemispheric asymmetry for P1 or N1 to faces. |
No |
No |
[54] Kovacs et al. (2005) |
12 |
4 |
8 |
Face (vs. hand)-specific N170 was larger over the RH. |
- |
Yes |
[55] Latinus et al. (2005) |
26 |
13 |
13 |
Mooney faces. Bilateral or left-sided P1 not sensitive to face-inversion. N1 larger on the RH to upright faces. |
No |
Yes |
[19] Liu et al. (2000) |
17 |
* |
* |
M170 larger to faces than animal and human forms at bilateral occipital/temporal sensors. |
- |
No |
[22] Meeren et al. (2005) |
12 |
9 |
3 |
Face-body compound images: lead main effect (p = 0.04) for P1 amplitude with O1>O2>Oz, but post hoc tests failed to reveal significant differences. ERPs to isolated faces: P1 and N1 to angry and fearful faces were not right-sided. |
No |
No |
[16] Pizzagalli et al. (2002) |
18 |
7 |
11 |
N1 larger over the right fusiform gyrus and affected by face likeness. |
- |
Yes |
[17] Pourtois et al. (2005) |
13 |
9 |
4 |
Unfiltered faces: P1 affected by emotional content (fear vs. neutral) in both hemispheres. N1 strongly right-lateralized to upright vs. inverted faces. LAURA source estimation for P1 and N1 topography in the left extra-striate visual cortex |
No |
Yes (but LH generator for source estimation) |
[23] Righart & Gelder (2005) |
12 |
10 |
2 |
N170 amplitudes were more negative for faces in fearful contexts compared to faces in neutral contexts, but only significantly for electrodes in the left hemisphere. |
No |
No |
[56] Rossion et al. (1999) |
14 |
5 |
9 |
N1 larger at posterior temporal sites to inverted faces. |
No |
Yes (not upright specific) |
[6] Rossion et al. (2003) |
16 |
6 |
10 |
N170 for faces compared to words in the right hemisphere only. |
No |
Yes |
[57] Rousselet et al. (2004) |
24 |
12 |
12 |
P1 larger on the RH for both objects, animal and human faces. N1 much larger on the RH for face than objects, but asymmetry found for objects as well. |
Yes (Not face- specific) |
Yes/No (Not face- specific) |
[24] Valkonen-Korhonen et al. (2005) |
19 |
15 |
4 |
Control group: N1 Larger at T5/T6 in an emotion detection task (happy upright faces). |
- |
No |
[58] Yovel et al. (2003) |
12 |
7 |
5 |
N1 to symmetrical and left or right hemi-faces was larger at right temporal site. |
- |
Yes |