Subliminal access to abstract face representations does not rely on attention

Consciousness and Cognition

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 573-583

  Harry, Bronson ^a   Davis, Chris ^a   Kim, Jeesun ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Face identification; Masked repetition priming; Spatial attention

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; FACE RECOGNITION; FEMALE; HEAD POSITION; HUMAN; MALE; RECOGNITION; REPETITION PRIMING; RESPONSE TIME; SPATIAL ATTENTION; SYSTEMATIC ERROR; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; ATTENTION; AUSTRALIA; AWARENESS; CONSCIOUSNESS; CUES; FACE; FAMOUS PERSONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); REPETITION PRIMING; SPACE PERCEPTION; SUBLIMINAL STIMULATION;

EID: 84857502379     PISSN: 10538100     EISSN: 10902376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2011.11.007     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Abrams R.L., Greenwald A.G. Parts outweigh the whole (word) in unconscious analysis of meaning. Psychological Science 2000, 11:118-124.
2. Besner D., Risko E.F., Sklair N. Spatial attention as a necessary preliminary to early processes in reading. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 2005, 59(2):99-108.
3. Bindemann M., Burton A.M., Jenkins R. Capacity limits for face processing. Cognition 2005, 98:177-197.
4. Bindemann M., Jenkins R., Burton A.M. A bottleneck in face identification: Repetition priming from flanker images. Experimental Psychology 2009, 54:192-201.
5. Breber J.L., Macrae N.C. Faces, flowers and football boots: Capacity limits in distractor processing. Cognition 2008, 107:718-728.
6. Burton A.M., Bruce V., Hancock P.J.B. From pixels to people: A model of familiar face recognition. Cognitive Science 1999, 23:1-31.
7. Curcio C.A., Kimberly A.A., Sloan K.R., Lerea C.L., Hurley J.B., Klkock I.B., et al. Distribution and morphology of human cone photoreceptors stained with anti-blue opsin. Journal of Comparative Neurology 1991, 312:610-624.
8. Damian M.F. Congruity effects evoked by subliminally presented primes: Automaticity rather than semantic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2001, 27:154-165.
9. Devue C., Van der Stigchel S., Bredart S., Theeuwes J. You do not find your own face faster: You just look at it longer. Cognition 2009, 111:114-122.
10. de Gardelle V., Kouider S. How spatial frequencies and visual awareness interact during face processing. Psychological Science 2009, 21:58-66.
11. Fabre L., Lemaire P., Grainger J. Attentional modulation of masked repetition and categorical priming in young and older adults. Cognition 2007, 105:513-532.
12. Finkbeiner M., Palermo R. The role of spatial attention in nonconscious processing. Psychological Science 2009, 20:42-51.
13. Forster K.I. The pros and cons of masked priming. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 1998, 27:203-233.
14. Forster K.I. The intervenor effect in masked priming: How does masked priming survive across an intervening word?. Journal of Memory and Language 2009, 60:36-49.
15. Forster K.I., Forster J.C. DMDX: A windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2003, 35:116-124.
16. Henson R., Mouchlianitis E., Matthews W.J., Kouider S. Electrophysiological correlates of masked face priming. NeuroImage 2008, 40:884-895.
17. Hummel J.E. Complementary solutions to the binding problem in vision: Implications for shape perception and object recognition. Visual Cognition 2001, 8:489-517.
18. Jacoby L.L., Whitehouse K. An illusion of memory: False recognition influenced by unconscious perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1989, 118:126-135.
19. Jacques C., Rossion B. Electrophysiological evidence for temporal dissociation between spatial attention and sensory competition during human face processing. Cerebral Cortex 2007, 17:1055-1065.
20. Jenkins R., Lavie N., Driver J. Ignoring famous faces: Category-specific dilution of distractor interference. Perception & Psychophysics 2003, 65:298-309.
21. Kouider S., Eger E., Dolan R., Henson R. Activity in face-responsive brain regions in modulated by invisible, attended faces: Evidence from masked priming. Cerebral Cortex 2009, 19:13-23.
22. Lachter J., Forster K.I., Ruthruff E. Forty-five years after Broadbent (1958): Still no identification without attention. Psychological Review 2004, 111:880-913.
23. Marzouki Y., Grainger J., Theeuwes J. Exogenous spatial cueing modulates subliminal masked priming. Acta Psychologia 2007, 126:34-45.
24. O'Toole A., Abdi H., Deffenbacher K.A., Valentin D. Low-dimensional representation of faces in higher dimensions of the face space. Journal of the Optical Society of America A 1993, 10:405-411.
25. Palermo R., Rhodes G. The influence of divided attention on holistic face perception. Cognition 2002, 82:225-257.
26. Rossi E.A., Roorda A. The relationship between visual resolution and cone spacing in the human fovea. Nature Neuroscience 2010, 13:156-157.
27. Tong F., Nakayama K. Robust representations for faces: Evidence from visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human, Perception and Performance 1999, 25:1016-1035.
28. Thoma V., Hummel J.E., Davidoff Jules. Evidence for holistic representations of ignored images and analytic representations of attended images. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2004, 30:257-267.
29. Tsal Y. Movements of attention across the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1983, 9:523-530.
30. Vuilleumier P. How brains beware: Neural mechanisms of emotional attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2005, 9:1364-1366.