It has been a while since masks were introduced to protect against Covid19, and recently I began to experience its bizarre result.  Mask mandates encompass the lower half of the face – nose, mouth, cheeks and chin, leaving only expressive eyes.  Yet my memory of mask-wearing strangers would consist of their complete face, without ever having seen it.  Recent studies explain how masks affect our perception of faces (Freud et al., 2020), but I could find no research on “phantom face” application to those already masked.  To compensate, I invoked cognitive psychology concepts to explain.

First is the Phonemic Restoration Effect, a language perception skill of filling in missing phonemes – the smallest unit of speech denoting meaning such as a letter, and morphemes – units of phonemes comprising words and phrases – against a backdrop of atmospheric noise, based on phrase context.  Our minds are so good at deciphering linguistic elements in the midst of clamor that if the same were to be heard among silence we would understand it less (Wede, 2021).  Similarly, visual perception may complete the missing parts of a face among the obscuring visual “noise” of its mask, per visible portions.  Visualizing demands Mental Imagery – the sensing of stimuli in its physical absence, such as an object via visual, music via auditory or scent via olfactory images (Goldstein, 2015, p. 276).  Mental Imagery uses Prior Knowledge – environmental items we have encountered, in order to make the kind of Inferences – assumptions about new information based on past experience (Goldstein, 2015, p. 222), that we would need to create a phantom face.  Environmental knowledge can consist of semantic and physical regularities – usual details in scenes or repetitive contours in nature, we have come across, respectively (Goldstein, 2015, p. 67-68), like that of facial qualities seen since birth.

Reminiscence of “phantom” visual imagery requires Constructive Memory, a function of long-term memory to which stimuli over 20 seconds is shunted (Goldstein, 2015, p. 127).  Contrary to popular belief, memory is not like playing back a video, but a delicate medium built using extraneous data, subject to change (upon reenactment with alternate data) (Goldstein, 2015, p. 199).  Thus we can infuse facial ingredient facts as we assemble retrieved memory of our masked individual.  Which type of face to apply?  A Prototype:  The system we use to organize information, a median of the most typical items in the category of faces we know of, to exemplify a most appropriate match for the gender, body shape, height and even voice of this masked stranger.  Or better yet, the more exacting Exemplar – a specific or unusual prototype we have seen before (Goldstein, 2015, p. 253) such as the face of a friend, to construct upon this envisioned outsider.

None of this facial perception or imagery would be possible without gift of the Fusiform Face Area (FFA) Imagery Neurons, a location of brain cells to which only the viewing of faces excites.  The FFA receives help from other areas of our brain such as the frontal cortex, to evaluate the attractiveness, gaze direction and emotional expression of the face in question (Goldstein, 2015, p. 73).  Neurons responding to live faces also do the same toward facial visual imagery (Goldstein, 2015, p. 287), just as they would to our phantom face.

So, in a symphony of the above concepts perchance inventing the phantom face, the brain’s FFA uses mental visual imagery to construct a memory, which then restores missing facial features based on the prototype or exemplar of its prior knowledge of facial regularities, in order to place a freshly crafted face upon our newly met, masked individual.

References:

_______________________

Freud, E., Stajduhar, A., Rosenbaum, R.S., Avidan, G., Ganel, T.  (2020).  The COVID-19 pandemic masks the way people perceive faces.  Scientific Reports, 10, Article 22344.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-78986-9

Wede, J.  (2021).  Temporal induction of speech: multiple phonemic restoration by noise [Video].  Pennsylvania State University World Campus.  https://psu.instructure.com/courses/2130474/modules/items/33027149

Goldstein, E. B.  (2015).  Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience (4th ; student ed.).  Cengage Learning

I noticed my writing gets better with age.  Not my age, but that of my memories.  When I pen an incident shortly after it happens, I am left with too many details of rhetoric and no clear point.  However, after days or even years I can type it out with more clarity, decorated with the most salient particulars.  One would think reporting an event shortly after occurrence is the best way to go, the specifics still fresh.  But that is what make it worse:  The abundant facts cloud the meaning, and not until the encounter is mulled over does its most significant parts shine through.  It is by this design that our minds streamline the complexity of our experiences to consolidate them into teaching moments.  From an evolutionary perspective, this purging of inscriptional clutter aids survival by helping us decide (Goldstein, 2015, pp. 193, 185).

Over time, long term memories (LTM) are remembered semantically as the jist of what we absorbed, more so than episodically when we are taken back in mental time (Goldstein, 2015, pp. 158, 162).  Semantics have to do with meaning or facts and are often recalled independently of origin.  Sensory nuances recorded as we perceive new realities comprises the episodic memory from which later springs a refined semantic meaning of those sensates, in order to retain the relevant, including critical emotion, for use in conceptual form (Goldstein, 2015, pp. 166, 199).

Often referred to as “groove” formation in the brain during learning (Nichols, n.d.), long-term potentiation strengthens memory storage through the synaptic consolidation of increased firing rate, neurotransmitter transmission and formation of new proteins at the neuronal synaptic level, with systems consolidation eventually adjusting the overall shape of our neural network to accommodate (Goldstein, 2015, pp. 192-194).  The brain thus grows larger, its folds increased, as we learn new material (Nordqvist, 2004), and we become smarter in the miracle of limitless LTM.  The hippocampus located in the temporal lobe is key to pruning the LTMs it functions to form, artistically shown as an ice cream cone of connectivity between itself and parts of the cortex which memorizes such perceptions as color, form, placement, emotion, and thought, with the cone subsequently fading and leaving intact the ice cream of its bonds made between these participating cortical zones.  Some evidence has shown the hippocampus active during memory retrieval as well, but only the episodic (Goldstein, 2015, p. 196).

It is important to note is that retrieval is as essential as storage when it comes to memory – a supply useless without access.  Retrieval is best achieved via cued recall by matching context, state of emotion, task method or conditions met during storage, to efforts when trying to recall (Goldstein, 2015, p. 188).  No wonder I can write a paper after initial cluelessness, by jotting down cue ideas.  At times though, cues can bring forth more past recollections than we bargained for; a forgotten someone invoked by signature cologne, a vacation summoned by a song.  Perhaps this means that everything we ever experienced is stored between our ears, waiting for its prompt to come forward, an idea of interest to many.

Regardless, we remember what is most noteworthy through consolidation and retrieval – similar to the filtering of selective attention, while new episodic and then semantic enlightenment is translucently layered upon the old to enhance and associate before reconsolidation into new retentions (Goldstein, 2015, pp. 88, 199).  The quartz of our memory grows more facets as it becomes an increasing definitive summation of who we are and where we are headed, helping us to write better essays.

References:

_______________________

Goldstein, E. B.  (2015).  Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience  4th ; student ed.).  Cengage Learning.

Nichols, B. K.  (n.d.).  Create new habits: Cut a new groove.  Bryan Nichols and Associates Psychological Services, Inc.  https://drnicholsandassociates.com/articles/new-groove/

Nordqvist, C.  (February 1, 2004).  Juggling makes your brain bigger.  Medical News Today.  https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/5615#Use-it-or-Lose-it