Part Whole Recognition Task

Licensing: Included with an Inquisit license.

Background

The 'Part-Whole Face Recognition Task' (PWFRT) is a psychological test created by James W. Tanaka and Martha J. Farah in 1993 to measure holistic processing of faces based on the hypothesis that people perceive and remember faces as unified wholes rather than isolated collections of individual features. In their task, they had participants study face composites of several male faces and then tested their recognition of the faces in a (a) Whole Face Condition (e.g. "Harry's" face was compared to a face like Harry's but with a different mouth) in (b) feature condition (e.g. two mouths were given, and participants had to select 'Harry's' mouth) and c) Scrambled Face condition (e.g. a scrambled version of 'Harry's' face was compared to another scrambled face like Harry's but with a different mouth). Since the only difference in the recognition tasks was the 'mouth' feature, superior recognition in the 'Whole Face' condition demonstrates that human visual memory integrates individual facial parts into a comprehensive configural representation. Recognizing a feature depends heavily on the surrounding facial context, showing that face perception is fundamentally different from general object recognition.

Millisecond's PWFRT implements the design of Tanaka & Farah (1993) (Experiment 1) with different stimuli sets that were generated following the guidelines outlined in the procedural description of the task.

Task Procedure

The Millisecond PPWFRT compares whole face recognition to scrambled face recognition, tested in a blocked format (block order can be counterbalanced by groupnumber assignment). In either condition, participants first learn the names (e.g. Harry) of 6 male faces. All faces share the same hair and face outline and only differ in their eyes, nose and mouth. The encoding phase runs 5 learning blocks, each time presenting the 6 name-face combinations in a different order. Each face is presented for 5 seconds.

In the 'Whole' face condition (W), the individual face features eyes, nose and mouth are arranged in a face-TYPICAL arrangement:

Example Whole Face
Example Whole Face

In the 'Scrambled' face condition (S), the individual face features eyes, nose and mouth are arranged in a face-ATYPICAL arrangement:

Example Scrambled Face
Example Scrambled Face

The subsequent recognition phase presents two forced-choice tasks (order is randomized): one task presents participants with two faces (whole or scrambled, depending on current condition) and asks participants to select a specific face ("Which one is Harry?"). The faces only differ in one of the main features (e.g. the nose). The second task presents participants with a specific feature (e.g. nose) and participants are asked to select "Harry's nose".

Example Recognition Tests
Example Recognition Tests

What it Measures

The 'Part-Whole Face Recognition Task' (PWFRT) measures holistic face processing

Psychological domains

  • Visual Perception: Perception of the visual world through analytical processing or holistic processing
  • Memory & Recognition: Information encoding and retrieval processing

Main Performance Metrics

  • Recognition Accuracy: Proportion correct responses in the four recognition tasks (Wface, Wfeature, Sface, Sfeature)

Psychiatric Conditions

The following patient groups show distinct whole-face processing deficits when tested with the 'Part-Whole Face Recognition Task'

  • Prosopagnosia (Face Blindness)
  • Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
  • Schizophrenia
Part Whole Recognition Task
This implements the Part Whole Recognition Task designed by Tanaka & Farah (1993).
Duration: 8 minutes
(Requires Inquisit Lab)
(Run with Inquisit Web)
Last Updated
English (English)
Oct 26, 2026, 11:44PM

References

Google ScholarSearch Google Scholar for peer-reviewed, published research using the Inquisit Part Whole Recognition Task.

Tanaka, J.W. & Farah, M.J. (1993). Parts and wholes in face recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 46, 225-245.