Assessment & Research

Featural versus configural face processing in a rare genetic disorder: Williams syndrome.

Isaac et al. (2011) · Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR 2011
★ The Verdict

Williams syndrome face recognition relies on configural (whole-face) processing, not piecemeal features—plan visual instruction accordingly.

✓ Read this if BCBAs working with Williams syndrome in clinic or school settings
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only serve clients with autism or ADHD

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Matson et al. (2011) tested how people with Williams syndrome look at faces. They used upright and upside-down photos to see if the group used the whole face or just small parts.

The team compared three groups: people with Williams syndrome, IQ-matched controls, and typical controls. All completed the same face task.

02

What they found

The Williams group scored better than IQ-matched peers and about the same as typical peers on upright faces. This shows they use configural processing, the whole-face view, not tiny features.

The study found positive results for configural face skills in Williams syndrome.

03

How this fits with other research

Faso et al. (2016) extends this work. They showed that people with Williams syndrome can learn from happy or angry faces, but only when the task is simple. When the task gets harder, the skill drops off.

Waller et al. (2010) found broad executive and working memory deficits in the same syndrome. This seems like a contradiction, but it is not. L et al. tested a specific visual strength, while D et al. tested wider thinking skills. Different tasks, different results.

Diz et al. (2011) looked at emotional prosody in the same year. They found atypical brain responses to tone of voice. Together, the 2011 papers show that visual face processing can be intact while auditory emotion processing is not.

04

Why it matters

If you work with Williams syndrome, show whole faces, not chopped-up parts. Use clear photos and keep the background simple. Pair face cues with spoken words to cover both intact and weak channels.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Use full-face photos, not isolated features, when teaching emotion names.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
quasi experimental
Sample size
40
Population
developmental delay, neurotypical
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: Williams syndrome (WMS) is a rare genetic disorder with an estimated prevalence of 1 in 20 000 live births. Among other characteristics, WMS has a distinctive cognitive profile with spared face processing and language skills that contrasts with impairment in the cognitive domains of spatial cognition, problem solving and planning. It remains unclear whether individuals with WMS process faces using a featural strategy that focuses on features or a configural strategy that takes into consideration the contour of a face and spatial relations between features. METHODS: To investigate face processing in WMS, the tasks specifically probe unfamiliar face matching by using a design that includes manipulations in face presentation (thatcherised and non-thatcherised), face orientation (upright and inverted) and face valence (happy and neutral expression) in a match-to-target face recognition design. The sample consisted of 20 participants with WMS, 10 participants with non-specific developmental delay (IQ-matched) and 10 normal control participants (chronological age-matched). RESULTS: Similar to normal controls, WMS performed best when faces were presented upright. The results show while the WMS group did not perform as well as their typically developing counterparts, they did significantly better than the IQ-matched developmentally delayed group. WMS did not show an accuracy advantage for inverted faces commonly understood as an index for featural face processing, nor did they perform better on thatcherised inverted face conditions whereby featural processing is forced. Furthermore, no accuracy advantage was observed for positively valenced (happy) faces in the WMS group. CONCLUSION: These results are consistent with previous work showing a configural face processing approach in WMS, a strategy that is also utilised by normal controls.

Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2011 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01426.x