Masked prime stimuli can bias quot;freequot; choices between response alternatives

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 463-468

  Schlaghecken, Friederike ^a   Eimer, Martin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 4544378360     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196596     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. ARON, A. R., SCHLAGHECKEN, F., FLETCHER, P. C., BULLMORE, E. T., EIMER, M., BARKER, R., SAHAKIAN, B. J., & ROBBINS, T. W. (2003). Inhibition of subliminally primed responses is mediated by the caudate and thalamus: Evidence from functional MRI and Huntington's disease. Brain, 126, 713-723.
2. CHEESMAN, J., & MERIKLE, P. M. (1986). Distinguishing conscious from unconscious perceptual processes. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 40, 343-367.
3. 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, 597-600.
4. EIMER, M. (1999). Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of masked prime stimuli on motor activation and behavioral performance. Acta Psychologica, 101, 293-313.
5. EIMER, M., & SCHLAGHECKEN, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 1737-1747.
6. EIMER, M., & SCHLAGHECKEN, F. (2002). Links between conscious awareness and response inhibition: Evidence from masked priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 514-520.
7. EIMER, M., SCHUBÖ, A., & SCHLAGHECKEN, F. (2002). Locus of inhibition in the masked priming of response alternatives. Journal of Motor Behaviour, 34, 3-10
8. GESCHEIDER, G. A. (1997). Psychophysics: The fundamentals (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. LEUTHOLD, H., & KOPP, B. (1998). Mechanisms of priming by masked stimuli: Inferences from event-related brain potentials. Psychological Science, 9, 263-269.
12. MANDLER, G., NAKAMURA, Y., & VAN ZANDT, B. J. S. (1987). Nonspecific effects of exposure on stimuli that cannot be recognized. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 646-648.
13. MARCEL, A. J. (1983). Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking and word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 197-237.
14. 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. 123-150). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
15. SCHLAGHECKEN, F., & EIMER, M. (1997). The influence of subliminally presented primes on response preparation. Sprache & Kognition, 16, 166-175.
16. SCHLAGHECKEN, F., & EIMER, M. (2000). A central-peripheral asymmetry in masked priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1367-1382.
17. SCHLAOHECKEN, F., & EIMER, M. (2001). Partial response activation to masked primes is not dependent on response readiness. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 92, 208-222.
18. SCHLAGHECKEN, F., & EIMER M. (2002). Motor activation with and without inhibition: Evidence for a threshold mechanism in motor control. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 148-162.