From: Gender differences in hemispheric asymmetry for face processing
Papers (Authors and year) | # Ss | Gender | P1 and N1 distribution and effects | Right asymmetry for face processing | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  | 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. | Â | 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). | Â | 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 |