Slashdot Mirror


Brain Region That Recognizes Faces Keeps Growing in Adulthood (engadget.com)

An anonymous reader shares an Engadget report: Neurologists thought that your brain was basically set once you hit early childhood, but researchers from Stanford have discovered one part that keeps growing. Using new MRI imaging techniques, they found that the "fusiform gyrus," which is mostly responsible for recognizing human faces, keeps expanding well after other regions have stopped. The research could lead to more sophisticated cellular analysis of the brain and help patients with a disorder called "facial blindness." Normally, our brain actually loses neurons between early childhood and puberty in a process called "pruning." That applies to visual parts of the brain that identify things like cityscape or hallways, but not faces. The researchers used two different MRI machines to scan both brain activity and density in two different parts of the brain: the region responsible for identifying faces, and an area used for other types of visual recognition. They then compared those structures in the brains of children (aged five to 12) to adults between 22 to 28. It turned out that adults had thicker fusiform gyrus regions than kids, different levels of proteins and cells and more activity. By contrast, the other visual regions showed lower levels of development.

47 comments

  1. What an odd coincidence... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Fusiform Gyrus" is my porn name.

    1. Re:What an odd coincidence... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      You must be more into missionary than doggy then.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:What an odd coincidence... by sycodon · · Score: 1

      This explains my ability to recognize the ever increasing numbers of porn stars in my pics folder.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  2. That's reasonable ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... a lot of faces keep growing in adulthood, too.

  3. I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Do more extroverted individuals notice an even greater increase in density... or was this increase noticed in members of the study despite sociability.

    In other words... it might be easy to think "well, we keep meeting new people through out our lives, and considering how important social ties are to humans, it only makes sense that one part of the brain would keep growing". But that naturally leads me to wonder "do loners notice the same brain growth?"

    1. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why does everyone look familiar to me?

    2. Re:I wonder... by erapert · · Score: 1

      How do you quantify extroversion? Don't you need to be able to quantify extroversion before you can correlate it with brain matter density?

    3. Re:I wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe number of interactions with others per day and some self evaluation or personality test?

    4. Re:I wonder... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      You live in China?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:I wonder... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      For the purposes of the question asked, "extroverted individuals" is presumably a shorthand for "people who talk to new people more often" (and thus have more faces to remember). The true definition of extroversion isn't relevant.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  4. Neurologists thought what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Neurologists thought that your brain was basically set once you hit early childhood

    Around here the big excuse for making marijuana legal at 21 but not 18 was "your brain is still growing well into your 20s, if you start smoking weed at 18 your brain will never finish growing properly." Did they forget to consult a neurologist?

    1. Re:Neurologists thought what? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Neurologists thought that your brain was basically set once you hit early childhood

      Around here the big excuse for making marijuana legal at 21 but not 18 was "your brain is still growing well into your 20s, if you start smoking weed at 18 your brain will never finish growing properly." Did they forget to consult a neurologist?

      No. Two things - first, the idea that the brain was 'basically set' in childhood hasn't been part of the neurology literature for, oh, decades. Of course biology is more complex than a once sentence explanation. Parts of the brain change in childhood, parts change in adolescents and yes, less change happens as an adult but the brain is still capable of learning new things well into the 80's (for some people). Psychoactive drugs work on younger brains differently than older brains. Society has taken that to try to limit drug use (licit or illicit) in children and relax the issue for adults. That is reasonable but not necessarily correct.

      Second, the legal concept of adult has no corollary in medicine unless you are thinking about sexual maturity. Now, every one here is thinking about sexual maturity but that is a different thread. The law has to stuff a complex continuum into essentially a binary decision. Won't work for everyone or everything. Even when you tease the issue out a bit - say legal age of consent for sex and legal age to sign a contract - the decisions are still arbitrary and capricious. It will stay that way for a very long time.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Neurologists thought what? by erapert · · Score: 1

      ...the decisions are still arbitrary and capricious. It will stay that way for a very long time.

      Agreed. Law is nothing more than "everyone 'round these parts has agreed to work things out in a certain way 'cuz that's how we like it."
      If law overlaps morality that is purely coincidental.
      If law coincides with biology that is purely coincidental.
      If law is Just then that is purely coincidental.
      The job of law makers is to get law as close as possible to these ideals, but it's still just a matter of judgement.

      But anyway, back to the subject: our brains grow and change in response to what we do with them. In this respect the brain is much like a muscle. If you work out habitually your muscles get big and strong. Your habitual thoughts and mental tasks have an effect on your brain.

      This is why idiots are so obnoxious to be around-- they ruin everything.
      This is why intelligent and thoughtful people are refreshing-- they make competence a habit.

      Making your kids work hard in school and instilling discipline and focus into your children is the best thing you can do for them.
      It's the difference between the honest rich and the habitually poor.

      We should not reward those who make stupid decisions and thus ruin their lives and others'. (I'm arguing against communism here)
      We should weed out those who make good and intelligent decisions by letting them bubble up to the top on their merits. (I'm arguing for libertarianism and free market ideals here)

  5. I guess I'm an outlier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With me, it was the region that recognized tits and asses.

  6. Not for me by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can't remember faces to save my life. It's great, you get to meet a lot of new people every day...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Not for me by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I can remember random movie lines from films and TV shows I saw decades ago, but faces and names drop through my brain like water through a sieve. I've gotten very good at faking knowing who a person is, but I still have trip-up moments where I need to ask my wife who a person was.

      "That was Jenny. Don't you remember? We saw her, her husband Tom, and their kids Jane and Billy on June 3rd three years ago while shopping for clothes. We talked for 30 minutes about how our children were doing in school. Remember now?"

      I never remember it. I have no clue how my wife retains all that "social information." My brain just doesn't seem to be built for that.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Not for me by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      A more interesting experiment would be to take an adult that doesn't recall faces well and then train them. There are a number of mental tricks that some people who's livelihood depends on social graces use to help remember people. Scan the brain before and after. See if there is enough change to be visible on the fMRI.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Not for me by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "I never remember it. I have no clue how my wife retains all that "social information." My brain just doesn't seem to be built for that."

      My fusiform gyrus seems to be stuck in infancy too. But I can identify people by voice, rather than by face.

    4. Re:Not for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember voices more than faces. And lucky for me, I once recognized a voice behind me I had not heard in about a year... turned around to say hi to my friend... and was introduced to my now wife. A cool trait after all! (Even if she says I can't hear her or understand her. Or wait maybe that's another talent?).

    5. Re:Not for me by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      Same here. I can rattle off , "Clive Llyod scored 242 not out in the Bombay match, sixth test in the series, Indian second innings collapsed, only Brijesh Patel broke 50". But names and faces? ... complete blank.

      My conversation would be like: "Did you see Avinash?"

      "Eh?"

      "With Kamala, Blue sari, red necklace..."

      "mmm?"

      "He had gold rimmed glasses... Plaid shirt ..."

      "not sure"

      "Volvo"

      "Yes! they had the station wagon, silver, New Jersey plates, Pink Genesha on the dash..."

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    6. Re:Not for me by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps if you can trick yourself into seeing people as objects...

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    7. Re: Not for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm also very good at voices. Faces do stick but it takes a long time. Names regularly disappear when I need them the most - I can have everything about the person in my mind, including the face, but not the name. This even happens for people I've known for years. The connection from the name to the rest of the info is fine, but not the connection back.
      I'm good at remembering settings and situations, so sometimes I have to ask someone whose face I've lost how we met or what we did, and then it all comes back.
      Sometimes when I try to imagine a face, it's representation in my mind will warp or diffuse.
      I was shy and had a small circle for most of my youth, but I don't know if this issue was a contributing factor to this, or a consequence of it.
      I can remember facts excellently if they interest me. I love science and have done a lot of electronics and pyrotechnics projects. I sometimes wish people would have named like potassium perchlorate or sulfur hexafluoride; I'm sure I'd remember those just fine.

    8. Re:Not for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An old girlfriend of mine once introduced me to a friend of hers by saying "of course, you two would remember each other". Being basically face-blind I did what I always do in such cases and faked recognition, hoping that something would jog my memory at some point, preferably before things got awkward. We talked for a good 5 minutes before she said something like "I'm sorry, but i can't remember your name", and I had to admit the same. Turns out she was also practically face-blind, we had never met, and my girlfriend was curious to see how long it would take us to realise.

    9. Re:Not for me by epine · · Score: 1

      Memory is complex.

      I'd rank myself at the top of the spectrum in what Paul Ekman / Daniel Goleman term "cognitive empathy" (also called perspective-taking).

      Yet I can draw the most amazing blanks when encountering someone I haven't seen recently—for the first five minutes. Gradually it all comes back. I tend to recognize people far quicker by their physical mannerisms than by face, dress, or other static aspects of appearance. I recall ambiguities I've detected in people far better than their outward, declared identity.

      My sister, by contrast, never fails to recognize someone on first glance, complete with name, recent concerns, context of last meeting, and last fragment of personal information exchanged. "Stephanie, how's it going with new job assignment? Oh, I like this necklace. Is it new? Hey, you know what? I saw Bob downtown just last week. Are you still in touch?" and so on. Meanwhile, I would still be at "you know, that walk looks familiar, and there's that ironic tilt of the head—there's something lurking behind that I haven't figured out yet—I so know this chick, whatsherfuckingname".

      It's not just a profound difference in social orientation. My sister's social skills are, well ... social. Whereas my social skills are cognitive. I pick up many shades of a person's internal self-image vs their external self-image and projected self-image. My sister socializes first, connects second. I connect first, socialize second. And both our memories reflect this.

      A long time ago, when we were growing up, I used to grief her about watching the same TV shows. "Don't you remember? You watched this show last summer. That guy is going to do this, and this girl is going to do that. The dialogue was so bad, I could hardly concentrate on my calculus assignment from the next room." She never seemed to recall watching the same show twice.

      Now, on basic personal dossier, she'd beat me 99 times out of 100. Until it gets deep.

      What can you figure out from a face anyway? Whether someone is Jewish? How useless. What you can tell from microscopic hitches in eye movement or verbal delivery will tell you whether a person is pretending to be someone they're really not, or not. Fixed or flexible? Now we're getting somewhere.

      I can only conclude that memory is deeply conditioned on the purposes in life we choose to regard as most important.

      When I was roughly thirty, I looked at a photo of my grade two classroom, and remembered nearly every face and name (pretty much a fixed cohort through grade five, which certainly helped).

      On a parallel note, I suck at basic plot analysis. Never had any gift with the conventions of genre fiction. I've sat beside people steeped in genre who seem to process fiction (whether a book or a movie) the way the Terminator itemizes conversational gambits, whereas I anticipate nothing immediate, but somewhere during the second act I'll start to growl, "this director is going to panic and fuck the ending, I just know it already" (by the time a film is edited, the director's success/failure in bringing the movie home is front and center in everyone's mind—director, editor, producer—so these early hints are not incidental). Yet again, conventions of form are slow for me, while deeper traces knock early.

      In particular, movies that go for the fake suspense scene never work for me. He's dead! No, he's not really dead! LOTR pulls this stunt quite a few times (Frodo, Aragorn, Samwise; all the hobbits snug in their feathery Bree beds; meanwhile while Gandalf struts around as the meme personified). The form never hooks me enough to take me along on these silly ruses. After a certain amount of time wandering around in the labyrinths of tvtropes (a quantity of time that shall remain nameless), I now pick up much of this on an analytical level.

    10. Re:Not for me by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      This is really cruel. I hate it when people do that.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Not for me by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Ok, I'm game. Let's get it going.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:Not for me by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Ironically, seeing people as objects can be a great help in crowds. My wife hates crowds. I don't love them, but don't mind venturing into them as much. My theory is that she sees all these people, interprets attitudes about us based on what they do or say near us, and sees their actions and judges how rude these people are being. I, on the other hand, view the crowds of people as a series of mobile objects. I'm not so rude as to just barrel through them, knocking them over, but I also don't care if one of the "objects" thinks I'm rude because I've led my boys ahead of them when they're walking slowly.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    13. Re:Not for me by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      For me and my wife, I'm sure that Autism plays something of a role. My son was diagnosed as autistic a few years back (Asperger's Syndrome) and while reading up on the subject everything clicked. I've always known I was different from "normal people," but never knew why. Growing up and loving Star Trek, I always associated with Data - always trying to figure out social situations and feeling utterly baffled by things that most people got so easily. Over the years, I've gotten pretty good. I can have actual conversations and deal with most social situations that I encounter.

      Still, nonverbal cues are lost on me. My wife is neurotypical and it always amazes me when we go into meetings with people. I'll come out thinking the meeting went well, but she'll point out that this person was rolling their eyes and that person was doing that, etc. She'll have an entirely different view of the meeting because she catches all these nonverbal cues that I miss. It's one reason I love online conversations. The closest you come to nonverbal cues is emoticons or emoji and those are simple to understand.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  7. Computerized Glasses by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

    A few years back where Google Glasses were gaining in popularity (and controversy), I was looking forward to them. I wanted them to come with a facial recognition application that would put little floating name tags over people's heads along with some pertinent information.

    "Name: Murray Douglas. Known Via: Work. Association: Developed department X website for him in June 2007. Last sighting: Two years ago in the mall while clothes shopping."

    I'd completely buy a pair of computerized glasses if I never had to worry about not recognizing people's faces or forgetting people's names (or even worse, misremembering and calling someone I've known for years by the wrong name) ever again.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Computerized Glasses by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      there's a Black Mirror episode about something like it, I think

    2. Re:Computerized Glasses by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      On multiple occasions I've had people come up to me, remembering who I was, and I've had no idea who they were.

      I had one girl walk up to me and start talking to me excitedly once, as if I were an old friend. I had worked with her about 4 years before. After she jogged my memory for a bit about who she was, I recalled that, yes- I did remember that I worked with her at a previous job (one I had for 3 years) and not only did I work with her at the same path- our paths at work would cross a couple times a week, I even wrote an application just for her (which means I must have done quite a bit of interacting with her). Once I learnt about the application I had written for her that did make me remember that we were social with each other back then.

      Somehow over the 4 years since then, (despite me talking fairly frequently with her in the past) I had forgotten both her name and her face. I'm not old, either, still in my 30's. I just forget names and faces if they're drop out of my life.

      I felt pretty bad. She was excited to see me and catch up with me, and it took 5 minutes of her explaining who she was before I could pin point her. I think I've already forgot her name and face again.

      So long story short... absolutely, it would be great if I had glasses with that feature on them.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:Computerized Glasses by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      It's about more than just that. It's also about having everything you've ever seen recorded so you can re-see it again any time you want to. This results in unexpected consequences.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    4. Re:Computerized Glasses by fbobraga · · Score: 1

      not that - from this last season (there's "ratings" about people, like "likes" in Facebook or YouTube - found it: http://sharetv.com/shows/black... )

    5. Re:Computerized Glasses by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

      ... or even worse, misremembering and calling someone I've known for years by the wrong name ...

      During sex.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    6. Re:Computerized Glasses by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      OK. I haven't seen the most recent season.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    7. Re:Computerized Glasses by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Never that bad, but recently someone I've known for years bought my book and wanted me to sign it for them. My mind picked that exact moment to misplace their name. I asked if she wanted it personalized (thinking maybe I could get away with just signing my name) and she said "Of course, after all, we're friends." I was trapped. My mind offered up "Susan" so I asked if I should make it out to Sue or Susan. Needless to say, that wasn't even close to her name.

      On the bright side, with all my embarrassment over the situation, I don't think I'll ever forget that person's name again.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  8. Make sense when you think about it. by rnturn · · Score: 1

    Without even having read the article yet (looking forward to it though), it makes complete sense for this to be the case. If the brain didn't continue to grow and adapt this way, you'd have a tough time recognizing someone's face after a few years. Who hasn't gone to a reunion or some other social event and recognized someone that you hadn't seen in years, even decades?

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  9. Watch out! by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

    What out, here comes his head!! (because he meets a lot of new people)

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
  10. Blurry images are harder to process by chadimus · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this is related to poorer eyesight as we age. If we assume recognizing a face from a modest distance and distinguishing one person form another is more important than some other recognition tasks (recognition tasks?). It would certainly seem harder. So maybe your body just assumes it better up it's game as your eyes degenerate or a Cave Lion eats one of them. It would also be interesting to see if there's a correlation between poorer eyesight (not necessarily due to age) and this. Although I assume that most of the subjects either had pretty decent vision or generally corrected their vision with glasses.

  11. Really? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "Normally, our brain actually loses neurons between early childhood and puberty in a process called "pruning." "

    Our priest said, that puberty process killing neurons was called 'jerking off'.

  12. I don't think i have that one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really think might be missing that region. recently ran into a guy whom i've seemingly never seen before. turned out to be my brother-in-law's brother, whom i've met several times.

  13. Adults ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... meet more people.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  14. I'm brilliant by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I'm brilliant at remembering names and faces.

    I do, however, have trouble linking the two together.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  15. Apparently I'm stunted. by Chas · · Score: 1

    Because I'll be damned if I can recognize people by their faces most of the time.
    Yes, with long-time exposure, I can kinda get it. But for most people, I struggle over even tiny information.

    Probably comes from being dropped on my head so much as a kid.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  16. Surely this will change by dohzer · · Score: 1

    Surely this will change now that everyone has a book of faces that recognises them for you.

  17. All your face are belong to Gyrus by blackprint · · Score: 1

    I left my office one day and a guy walks up to me and says, "Hey, want a ride to your car?" and I stare blankly at this weirdo with a beard for what felt like minutes (probably around 10 seconds) filling in the time with my excellent improv skills, "Um, uhhh", scrunching my face up, he seemed excited or amused, "I'm parked across the street," he says, finally I realize it's my boss that I've worked with on a daily basis the past 2 or 3 years, and all day that very same day. That was before I realized "facial blindness" was a thing, and I think being aware of it has helped me improve quite a bit. Usually if I go with my instincts I'm right about 70% of the time, but the other 30% is not fun. In my defense it would really help if everyone stopped looking a lot like everyone else.

  18. true for me by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    When I was considerably younger, I had great difficulty remembering names, could never correctly identify actors in new films (even tho' I'd seen them inseveral previous ones), and so on.

    I can't say for sure whether it's aging -- of which I seem to have done quite a lot -- or careful self-trainng that has changed my ability a bit. First thing I learned about the movie-actor thing was to listen to the voice rather than study the face. That worked.

    But even now, I'm much better at remembering people's dogs' names than the folks themselves :-), and I often have a problem remembering a person's name if I happen to meet them in an unexpected environment, say a co-worker who pops up when i'm on vaca in a different city. I recognize the face pretty well, but not the name.

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw