Abstract
Visual stimuli that are made invisible by a following mask can affect overt motor responses and nonmotor processing. Previous studies have compared the effects of primes that were perceptually similar to the subsequent stimulus with those of primes that were perceptually similar to an alternative stimulus. The present study examined the effect of congruent primes that are perceptually dissimilar to the target (or the cue) but are nonetheless associated with the same response (or the same task) as the later stimulus. Positive and inverse priming effects (negative compatibility effects) were studied in a target priming paradigm (Experiments 1 and 2) and in a cue priming paradigm (Experiments 3 and 4). The results showed stronger priming effects with similar primes than with dissimilar congruent primes. However, the effects of perceptually dissimilar congruent primes differed from those of dissimilar incongruent primes. These findings suggest that a substantial part of both positive target and cue priming effects is produced at levels of processing that are not affected by perceptual similarity. The version of inverse priming effects examined in this study, however, seems to arise from perceptual processing that is affected by the similarity between a prime and the stimulus that follows the mask.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Breitmeyer, B. (1984).Visual masking: An integrative approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Le Clec’H, G., Koechlin, E., Mueller, M., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., et al. (1998). Imaging unconscious semantic priming.Nature,395, 597–600.
Eimer, M. (1999). Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of masked prime stimuli on motor activation and behavioural performance.Acta Psychologica,101, 293–313.
Eimer, M., &Schlaghecken, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1737–1747.
Eimer, M., &Schlaghecken, F. (2002). Links between conscious awareness and response inhibition: Evidence from masked priming.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9, 514–520.
Eimer, M., Schubö, A., &Schlaghecken, F. (2002). Locus of inhibition in the masked priming of response alternatives.Journal of Motor Behavior,34, 3–10.
Enns, J. T., &Di Lollo, V. (1997). Object substitution: A new form of masking in unattended visual locations.Psychological Science,8, 135–139.
Eriksen, B. A., &Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 143–149.
Eriksen, C. W., &Schultz, D. W. (1979). Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results.Perception & Psychophysics,25, 249–263.
Francis, G. (1997). Cortical dynamics of lateral inhibition: Metacontrast masking.Psychological Review,104, 572–594.
Grice, G. R., &Gwynne, J. W. (1985). Temporal characteristics of noise conditions producing facilitation and interference.Perception & Psychophysics,37, 495–501.
Klapp, S. T. (2005). Two versions of the negative compatibility effect: Comment on Lleras and Enns (2004).Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,134, 431–435.
Klapp, S. T., &Haas, B. W. (2005). Nonconscious influence of masked stimuli on response selection is limited to concrete stimulus—response associations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & 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 & Performance,25, 976–992.
Leuthold, H., &Kopp, B. (1998). Mechanisms of priming by masked stimuli: Inferences from event-related potentials.Psychological Science,9, 263–269.
Lingnau, A., &Vorberg, D. (2005). The time course of response inhibition in masked priming.Perception & Psychophysics,67, 545–557.
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.
Lleras, A., &Enns, J. T. (2005). Updating a cautionary tale of masked priming: A reply to Klapp (2005).Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,134, 436–440.
Mattler, U. (2003). Priming of mental operations by masked stimuli.Perception & Psychophysics,65, 167–187.
Mattler, U. (2005). Inhibition and decay of motor and nonmotor priming.Perception & Psychophysics,67, 285–300.
Mattler, U. (in press). Inverse target and cue priming effects of masked stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
Miller, J. (1987). Priming is not necessary for selective-attention failures: Semantic effects of unattended, unprimed letters.Perception & Psychophysics,41, 419–434.
Mordkoff, J. T., &Yantis, S. (1991). An interactive race model of divided attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 520–538.
Neumann, O. (1990). Direct parameter specification and the concept of perception.Psychological Research,52, 207–215.
Neumann, O., &Klotz, W. (1994). Motor responses to nonreportable masked stimuli: Where is the limit of direct parameter specification? In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 124–150). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Schlaghecken, F., &Eimer, M. (2000). A central-peripheral asymmetry in masked priming.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 1367–1382.
Schlaghecken, F., &Eimer, M. (2002). Motor activation with and without inhibition: Evidence for a threshold mechanism in motor control.Perception & Psychophysics,64, 148–162.
Schmidt, T. (2000). Visual perception without awareness: Priming responses by color. In T. Metzinger (Ed.),Neural correlates of consciousness: Empirical and conceptual questions (pp. 157–169). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schmidt, T. (2002). The finger in flight: Real-time motor control by visually masked color stimuli.Psychological Science,13, 112–118.
Verleger, R., Jaskowski, 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.
Vorberg, D. (1998). Reaktionen auf unbewusste visuelle Reize: Umkehr von Bahnung in Hemmung [Responses to conscious visual stimuli: reversal of priming into inhibition]. In H. Lachnit, A. Jacobs, & F. Rösler (Eds.),Experimentelle Psychologie: Abstracts der 40. Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen (p. 386). Lengerich: Pabst.
Vorberg, D. (2000). Wann wirken bewusste Reize anders als unbewusste? [When do conscious stimuli behave differently than unconscious stimuli?]. In H. H. Bülthoff, M. Fahle, K. R. Gegenfurtner, & H. A. Mallot (Eds.),Beiträge zur 3. Tübinger Wahrnehmungskonferenz (p. 33). Kirchentellinsfurt: Knirsch.
Vorberg, D., Mattler, U., Heinecke, A., Schmidt, T., &Schwarzbach, J. (2003). Different time courses for visual perception and action priming.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,100, 6275–6280.
Vorberg, D., Mattler, U., Heinecke, A., Schmidt, T., &Schwarzbach, J. (2004). Invariant time course of priming with and without awareness. In C. Kaernbach, E. Schröger, & H. Müller (Eds.),Psychophysics beyond sensation: Laws and invariants of human cognition (pp. 271–288). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wolff, P. (1989).Einfluss des maskierten Testreizes auf die Wahlreaktion auf den Maskierreiz bei Metakontrast. Paper presented at the 31. Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen, Bamberg, Germany.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mattler, U. On the locus of priming and inverse priming effects. Perception & Psychophysics 68, 975–991 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193359
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193359