Abstract
Motor responses can be facilitated by congruent visual stimuli and prolonged by incongruent visual stimuli that are made invisible by masking (direct motor priming). Recent studies on direct motor priming showed a reversal of these priming effects when a three-stimulus paradigm was used in which a prime was followed by a mask and a target stimulus was presented after a delay. A similar three-stimulus paradigm on nonmotor priming, however, showed no reversal of priming effects when the mask was used as a cue for processing of the following target stimulus (cue priming). Experiment 1 showed that the time interval between mask and target is crucial for the reversal of priming. Therefore, the time interval between mask and target was varied in three experiments to see whether cue priming is also subject to inhibition at a certain time interval. Cues indicated (1) the stimulus modality of the target stimulus, (2) the task to be performed on a multidimensional auditory stimulus, or (3) part of the motor response. Whereas direct motor priming showed the reversal of priming about 100 msec after mask presentation, cue priming effects simply decayed during the 300 msec after mask presentation. These findings provide boundary conditions for accounts of inverse priming effects.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrams, R. L., &Greenwald, A. G. (2000). Parts outweigh the whole (word) in unconscious analysis of meaning.Psychological Science,11, 118–124.
Allport, A., Styles, E. A., &Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Band, G. P., &van Boxtel, G. J. (1999). Inhibitory motor control in stop paradigms: Review and reinterpretation of neural mechanisms.Acta Psychologica,101, 179–211.
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., van de Moortele, P. F., &Le Bihan, D. (1998). Imaging unconscious semantic priming.Nature,395, 600–604.
Eimer, M. (1999). Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of masked prime stimuli on motor activation and behavioural performance.Acta Psychologica,101, 293–313.
Eimer, M., Hommel, B., &Prinz, W. (1995). S-R compatibility and response selection. ActaPsychologica,90, 301–313.
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.
Fehrer, E., &Raab, D. (1962). Reaction time to stimuli masked by metacontrast.Journal of Experimental Psychology,63, 143–147.
Francis, G. (1997). Cortical dynamics of lateral inhibition: Metacontrast masking.Psychological Review,104, 572–594.
Greenwald, A. G., Draine, S. C., &Abrams, R. L. (1996). Three cognitive markers of unconscious semantic activation.Science,273, 1699–1702.
Hommel, B. (1997). Interactions between stimulus-stimulus congruence and stimulus-response compatibility.Psychological Research,59, 248–260.
Houghton, G., &Tipper, S. P. (1994). A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.),Inhibitory mechanisms in attention, memory, and language (pp. 53–112). San Diego: Academic Press.
Kanwisher, N. (1987). Repetition blindness: Type recognition without token identification.Cognition,27, 117–143.
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.
Klinger, M. R., Burton, P. C., &Pitts, G. S. (2000). Mechanisms of unconscious priming: I. Response competition, not spreading activation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 441–455.
Klotz, W., &Neumann, O. (1999). Motor activation without conscious discrimination in metacontrast masking.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 976–992.
Law, M. B., Pratt, J., &Abrams, R. A. (1995). Color-based inhibition of return.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 402–408.
Leuthold, H., &Kopp, B. (1998). Mechanisms of priming by masked stimuli: Inferences from event-related potentials.Psychological Science,9, 263–269.
Loftus, G. R., &Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 476–490.
Mattler, U. (2003). Priming of mental operations by masked stimuli.Perception & Psychophysics,65, 167–187.
Milliken, B., &Tipper, S. P. (1998). Attention and inhibition. In H. Pashler (Ed.),Attention (pp. 191–222). Hove, U.K.: Psychological Press.
Monsell, S. (1996). Control of mental processes. In V. Bruce (Ed.),Unsolved mysteries of the mind (pp. 93–148). Hove, U.K.: Erlbaum.
Naccache, L., &Dehaene, S. (2001a). The priming method: Imaging unconscious repetition priming reveals an abstract representation of number in the parietal lobes.Cerebral Cortex,11, 966–974.
Naccache, L., &Dehaene, S. (2001b). Unconscious semantic priming extends to novel unseen stimuli.Cognition,80, 215–229.
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.
Pashler, H. E. (1998).The psychology of attention. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., &Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 849–860.
Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002). Activation and suppression in conflict tasks: Empirical clarification through distributional analyses. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.),Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 494–519). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rogers, R. D., &Monsell, S. M. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 207–231.
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.
Spence, C., &Driver, J. (1997). On measuring selective attention to an expected sensory modality.Perception & Psychophysics,59, 389–403.
Tipper, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory priming by ignored objects.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,37A, 571–590.
Vorberg, D. (1998). Reaktion auf unbewusste visuelle Reize: Umkehr von Bahnung in Hemmung. In H. Lachnit, A. Jacobs, & F. Roesler (Eds.),Experimentelle Psychologie (p. 386–387). Lengerich: Pabst.
Vorberg, D. (2002). Gibt es unbewusste Wahrnehmung, und wenn ja, warum nicht? In M. Baumann, A. Keinath, & J. F. Krems (Eds.),Experimentelle Psychologie (p. 8). Regensburg: Roderer Verlag.
Vorberg, D., & Lingnau, A. (in press). Time course of the negative compatibility effect with central and peripheral presentation of the effective stimuli.Perception & Psychophysics.
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.
Wentura, D. (2000). Dissociative affective and associative priming effects in the lexical decision task: Yes versus no responses to word targets reveal evaluative judgment tendencies.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 456–469.
Wolff, P. (1989).Einfluss des maskierten Testreizes auf die Wahlreaktion auf den Maskierreiz bei Metakontrast. Paper presented at the 31st Tagung experimentell arbeitender Psychologen, Bamberg, Germany.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mattler, U. Inhibition and decay of motor and nonmotor priming. Perception & Psychophysics 67, 285–300 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206492
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206492