Abstract

Information of which observers are not consciously aware can nevertheless influence perceptual processes. Whether subliminal information might exert an influence on working memory (WM) representations is less clear, and relatively few studies have examined the interactions between subliminal and supraliminal information in WM. We present 3 experiments examining this issue. Experiments 1a and b replicated the finding that orientation stimuli can influence behavior subliminally in a visuomotor priming task. Experiments 2 and 3 used the same orientation stimuli, but participants had to remember a target orientation and report it back by adjusting a probe orientation after a memory delay. Before or after presentation of the target orientation, a subliminal or supraliminal distracter orientation was presented that was either irrelevant for task completion and never had to be reported (Experiment 2), or was relevant for task completion because it had to be reported on some trials (Experiment 3). In both experiments, presentation of a supraliminal distracter influenced WM recall of the target orientation. When the distracter was presented subliminally, however, there was no bias in orientation recall. These results suggest that information stored in WM is protected from influences of subliminal stimuli, while online information processing is modulated by subliminal information.

Highlights

  • Subliminal stimuli have been shown to influence processing of subsequent stimuli at a number of levels—from low-level visual priming up to and including semantic priming

  • Participants were faster and more accurate to respond to an orientation stimulus when a supraliminal prime of the same orientation preceded the target stimulus

  • When the prime stimulus was presented subliminally, this effect reversed and participants were faster to respond to an orientation stimulus when the prime orientation was different to the target orientation

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Subliminal stimuli have been shown to influence processing of subsequent stimuli at a number of levels—from low-level visual priming up to and including semantic priming Eimer and Schlaghecken (2002) examined the influence of masked prime stimuli—which could not be identified above chance— on responses to a target stimulus and showed that both subliminal and supraliminal prime stimuli influenced participants’ reaction times (RTs) to target stimuli, though interestingly, in different ways. These results were replicated and their interpretation supported by additional control studies (see Eimer & Schlaghecken, 2003 for a review). If WM is abstracted from the perceptual and semantic representations used online for object identification, it may be that stimuli must be supraliminal, entering the limited-capacity WM store, to influence processing

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.