Schlaghecken, Friederike, Blagrove, Elisabeth and Maylor, Elizabeth A.. (2007) Incidental learning of S-R contingencies in the masked prime task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Vol.33 (No.5). pp. 1177-1188. ISSN 0096-1523

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Subliminal motor priming effects in the masked prime paradigm can only be obtained when primes are part of the task set. In 2 experiments, the authors investigated whether the relevant task set feature needs to be explicitly instructed or could be extracted automatically in an incidental learning paradigm. Primes and targets were symmetrical arrows, with target color, not shape, the response-relevant feature. Shape and color covaried for targets (e.g., <> always blue, >< always green), whereas primes were always black. Over time, a negative compatibility effect (NCE; response benefits when prime and target had different shapes) developed, indicating that primes affected the motor system. When target shape and color varied independently (control condition), no NCE occurred, in line with the assumption that the NCE reflects task set-dependent motor processes, not perceptual interactions.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Subjects:	B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology
Divisions:	Faculty of Science > Psychology
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):	Masking (Psychology), Perceptual-motor processes , Priming (Psychology), Masked priming
Journal or Publication Title:	Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Publisher:	American Psychological Association/Educational Publishing Foundation
ISSN:	0096-1523
Date:	October 2007
Volume:	Vol.33
Number:	No.5
Number of Pages:	12
Page Range:	pp. 1177-1188
Identification Number:	10.1037/0096-1523.33.5.1177
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Funder:	Economic and Social Research Council (Great Britain) (ESRC)
Grant number:	RES 000-22-0988 (ESRC)
References:	Ansorge, U., Heumann, M., & Scharlau, I. (2002). Influences of visibility, intentions, and probability in a peripheral cueing task. Consciousness and Cognition, 1, 528–545. Aron, A., Schlaghecken, F., Fletcher, P., Bullmore, E., Eimer, M., Barker, R., et al. (2003). Inhibition of subliminally primed responses is mediated by the caudate and thalamus: Evidence from fMRI and Huntington’s disease. Brain, 126, 713–723. Bowman, H., Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2006). A neural network model of inhibitory processes in subliminal priming. Visual Cognition, 13, 401–480. Brasted, P. J., & Wise, S. P. (2004). Comparison of learning-related neuronal activity in the dorsal premotor cortex and striatum. European Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 721–740. Cleeremans, A., Destrebecqz, A., & Boyer, M. (1998). Implicit learning: News from the front. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2, 406–416. Damian, M. F. (2001). Congruity effects evoked by subliminally presented primes: Automaticity rather than semantic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 154– 165. Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Le Clec, H. G., Koechlin, E., Mueller, M., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., et al. (1998, October 8). Imaging unconscious semantic priming. Nature, 395, 597–600. Eimer, M. (1999). Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of masked prime stimuli on motor activation and behavioral performance. Acta Psychologica, 101, 293–313. Eimer, M., Goschke, T., Schlaghecken, F., & Stu¨rmer, B. (1996). Explicit and implicit learning of event sequences: Evidence from a psychophysiological study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 970–987. Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1737–1747. Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2001). Response facilitation and inhibition in manual, vocal, and oculomotor performance: Evidence for a modalityunspecific mechanism. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 16–26. Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2002). Links between conscious awareness and response inhibition: Evidence from masked priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 514–520. Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2003). Response facilitation and inhibition in subliminal priming. Biological Psychology, 64, 7–26. Eimer, M., Schubo¨, A., & Schlaghecken, F. (2002). The locus of inhibition in the masked priming of response alternatives. Journal of Motor Behavior, 34, 3–10. Frith, C., & Dolan, R. (1996). The role of the prefrontal cortex in higher cognitive functions. Cognitive Brain Research, 5, 175–181. Hoffmann, J., & Sebald, A. (2005). When obvious covariations are not even learned implicitly. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17, 449–480. Kanwisher, N. (1987). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token identification. Cognition, 27, 117–143. Kihlstrom, J. F. (1999). The psychological unconscious. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 424–442). New York: Guilford Press. Klapp, S. T. (2005). Two versions of the negative compatibility effect: A reply to Lleras and Enns (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 431–435. Klapp, S. T., & Haas, B. W. (2005). The nonconscious influence of masked stimuli on response selection is limited to concrete stimulus–response associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 193–209. Klapp, S. T., & Hinkley, L. B. (2002). The negative compatibility effect: Unconscious inhibition influences reaction time and response selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 255–269. Klotz, W., & Neumann, O. (1999). Motor activation without conscious discrimination in metacontrast masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 976–992. Kunde, W., Kiesel, A., Hoffmann, J. (2003). Conscious control over the content of unconscious cognition. Cognition, 88, 223–242. Laubach, M. (2005). Who’s on first? What’s on second? The time course of learning in corticostriatal systems. Trends in Neuroscience, 28, 509– 511. Lleras, A., & Enns, J. T. (2004). Negative compatibility or object updating? A cautionary tale of mask-dependent priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 475–493. Naccache, L., & Dehaene, S. (2001). Unconscious semantic priming extends to novel unseen stimuli. Cognition, 80, 215–229. Neumann, O. (1989). Kognitive Vermittlung und direkte Parameterspezifikation: Zum Problem mentaler Reprasentation in der Wahrnehmung [Cognitive mediation and direct parameter specification: On the problem of mental representation in perception]. Sprache & Kognition, 8, 32–49. Neumann, O., & Klotz, W. (1994). Motor responses to nonreportable, masked stimuli: Where is the limit of direct parameter specification? In C. Umilta` & M. Moskovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 123–150). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 1–32. Pasupathy, A., & Miller, E. K. (2005, February 24). Different time courses of learning-related activity in the prefrontal cortex and striatum. Nature, 433, 873–876. Schlaghecken, F., Bowman, H., & Eimer, M. (2006). Dissociating activation, inhibition, and disinhibition in low-level motor control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 618–632. Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (1997). The influence of subliminally presented primes on response preparation. Sprache & Kognition, 16, 166–175. Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2000). A central/peripheral asymmetry in subliminal priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1367–1382. Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2001). Partial response activation to masked primes is not dependent on response readiness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 92, 208–222. Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2002). Motor activation with and without inhibition: Evidence for a threshold mechanism in motor control. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 148–162. Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2004). Subliminal stimuli can bias “free” choices between response alternatives. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 463–468. Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2006). Active masks and active inhibition: A comment on Lleras and Enns (2004) and on Verleger, Jaskowski, Aydemir, van der Lubbe, and Groen (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 484–494. Schlaghecken, F., & Maylor, E. A. (2005). Motor control in old age: Evidence of impaired low-level inhibition. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences, 60, p158–p161. Schlaghecken, F., Mu¨nchau, A., Bloem, B., Rothwell, J. C., & Eimer, M. (2003). Slow frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation affects reaction times, but not priming effects, in a masked prime task. Clinical Neurophysiology, 114, 1272–1277. Schlaghecken, F., & Sisman, R. (2006). Subliminal response priming in children: Evidence for a subcortical locus of the negative compatibility effect. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2, 7–19. INCIDENTAL LEARNING AND MASKED PRIMING 1187 Schlaghecken, F., Stu¨rmer, B., & Eimer, M. (2000). Chunking processes in the learning of event sequences. Memory & Cognition, 28, 821–831. Seth, A. K., Baars, B. J., & Edelman, D. B. (2005). Criteria for consciousness in humans and other mammals. Consciousness and Cognition, 14, 119–139. Sumner, P. (in press). Mask-induced priming and the negative compatibility effect. Experimental Psychology. Verleger, R., Jas´kowski, P., Aydemir, A., van der Lubbe, R. H. J., & Groen, M. (2004). Qualitative differences between conscious and nonconscious processing? On inverse priming induced by masked arrows. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 494–515.
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/31319

Data sourced from Thomson Reuters' Web of Knowledge

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item