Talk:Fusiform face area

The
The fusiform face area is actually very complex and there is a lot of relevent research about/going on about it. It deserves more than just a dictionary entry, it really does deserve it's own page. I don't have time to write it tonight, but I at least wanted to make the stub. Miserlou 06:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the Grill-Spector thing should be removed? It's more a 'current neuroscience soap opera event' than anything else. --dmd 16:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you, dmd KDevaney 04:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I have to disagree, the GS paper is the most important paper on this topic since the initial discovery of face-selectivity in the fusiform. Michael Tarr Sept 20, 2007

Unfortunately, analysis errors later led Grill-Spector to issue a Corrigendum. To quote Grill-Spector et al.: "A re-analysis of our data to address these concerns shows that our assertion that many voxels in the fusiform face area (FFA) show high selectivity to nonface objects was incorrect (Fig. 1)". - This is obviously against the paper's original argument (title = "High-resolution imaging reveals highly selective non face clusters in the fusiform face area"), and doesn't provide the support it once did for this statement in this wiki entry: "A paper by Kalanit Grill-Spector et al. also suggests that processing in the FFA is not exclusive to faces". One option would be to cite the paper as evidence that there is not sensitivity to non face objects, but I think it might be best just to remove the reference (which I will do now). Freeranging intellect (talk) 18:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

In fact Fusiform Gyrus implicated in face processing pre Kanwisher - cf. Added. Michael Tarr Sept 20, 2007


 * The facts are what is important; the discoveries, the information contained in studies, etc. What is of little interest to readers (and of little importance) is the dropping of non-notable names of people in the field, and seemingly-POV discussions about the validity of studies. If the study is in dispute, say so without bringing emotion into the discussion. This is science, people. Please try to be objective. On that note, I feel that I've cleaned up the article, and will remove the POV tag. If you feel that it should be added back, do so only after stating your reason(s) here on the talk page. Fuzzform 20:43, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Relationship to reading ability?
In an upper-level class I am currently enrolled in regarding written language disorders, we talked about the fusiform gyrus, and how it is involved in reading by literate subjects when presented with printed language. I am a little uncertain of the precise facts, but due to reading's extremely short life on an evolutionary timescale, I believe that the conclusion is that part of the left gyrus is generally subjugated for reading specialization, since there has been no selective pressure for the brain to evolve a region innately specialized for it (NOT writing or spelling, simply reading). If anyone can confirm this, I think it would definitely be noteworthy in the article. - Drlight11 (talk) 14:15, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Involved in more than just face perception?
According to studies performed by Gauthier, Skudlarski, Gore, and Anderson in 2000 and studies performed by Xu in 2005 the Fusiform Face Area is activated when recognizing other familiar objects. Anybody can elaborate on this maybe? 3:11 07 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I encourage you to do it yourself. If I can help out, please let me know.  Regards, Looie496 (talk) 17:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Prosopagnosia
I was under the impression that the fusiform was first associated with face processing because damage to it was often found to be related to face processing deficits. The section on prosopagnosia makes it seem that only one case evidences this link.Ninahexan (talk) 02:59, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Chinese character reference
The illustration of Chinese characters that appear two have two dots (eyes) above a long line (nose) next to the reference [18] under "History" is highly misleading. The original article did not use characters with face similarity, nor does it appear to draw the cited conclusions. Frankly, I think this picture and reference should be removed as it is very misleading with respect to the origin and function of the FFA.159.230.193.52 (talk) 14:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Learning and data comparisons
Professors and scholars make comparisons with the parahippocampal place area because it's responsible for landscape, cityscape and house but not facial response.

Wiki Education assignment: Human Cognition SP23
— Assignment last updated by Annann789 (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2023 (UTC)