From reaction (‘priming’) to motivated selection: changing conceptualizations of accessibility

Eitam, Baruch; Higgins, E. Tory

doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.05.017

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is especially relevant to the way we interpret the IB findings for two reasons. First, there is an additional critical property (other than attentional load) that makes IB tasks prone to report failure-task relevance, which is believed to modulate the degree with which visual experience activates 'knowledge' [53][54][55][56]. Put simply, task-irrelevant knowledge was postulated to fail to be 'functionally activated'-and hence, to not participate in even simple cognitive processes.…”

Section: Inattentional Blindness and Phenomenal Consciousness Withoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consciousness without report: insights from summary statistics and inattention ‘blindness’

Usher

Bronfman

Talmor

et al. 2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We contrast two theoretical positions on the relation between phenomenal and access consciousness. First, we discuss previous data supporting a mild Overflow position, according to which transient visual awareness can overflow report. These data are open to two interpretations: (i) observers transiently experience specific visual elements outside attentional focus without encoding them into working memory; (ii) no specific visual elements but only statistical summaries are experienced in such conditions. We present new data showing that under data-limited conditions observers cannot discriminate a simple relation (same versus different) without discriminating the elements themselves and, based on additional computational considerations, we argue that this supports the first interpretation: summary statistics (same/different) are grounded on the transient experience of elements. Second, we examine recent data from a variant of 'inattention blindness' and argue that contrary to widespread assumptions, it provides further support for Overflow by highlighting another factor, 'task relevance', which affects the ability to conceptualize and report (but not experience) visual elements.This article is part of the theme issue 'Perceptual consciousness and cognitive access'.

show abstract

Section: Inattentional Blindness and Phenomenal Consciousness Withoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consciousness without report: insights from summary statistics and inattention ‘blindness’

Usher

Bronfman

Talmor

et al. 2018

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A final potential explanation is also based on the abovementioned notion that relevance-based effects that are attributed to selective attention reflect selection at the level of knowledge activation rather than consciousness (Eitam & Higgins, 2010, 2016Usher et al, 2018). Accordingly, the current results are explained as follows (see a similar explanation for attribute amnesia in Wyble et al, 2018): Because colors are never relevant, the stimuli's colors are never represented, and when participants are (surprisingly) asked to report them, they find no knowledge to report.…”

Section: Different Types Of Cognitive Bblindness^?mentioning

confidence: 73%

“…The latter is argued to stem from rapid forgetting, and the former is thought to be based on so-called Posnerian selection (feature, object, or space based), and for which dimensional separability is irrelevant. Elsewhere (Eitam & Higgins, 2010, 2016Usher et al, 2018), it was argued that such Posnerian selection may also stem from the relevance-based activation of knowledge (the mental activation of semantic representations), but not from conscious experience itself (i.e., it does not select out of consciousness). The intriguing possibility that Garnerian selection of dimension does selects out of consciousness deserves further attention.…”

Section: Different Types Of Cognitive Bblindness^?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relevance-based processing: Little role for task-relevant expectations

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the role of advance expectations in generating relevance-based selection, using a version of cognitive Bblindnesst hat is driven solely by task relevance. With this irrelevance-induced blindness, participants often fail to report a feature of an irrelevant stimulus, even though the levels of perceptual and cognitive load are minimal (i.e., capacity limitations are not met). Hence, with this phenomenon, selection is based solely on task relevance. In two experiments, we examined such relevance-based selection with a new paradigm in which the participants had to report the location of an object appearing on one of two rings. Critically, while in Experiment 1 the participants could form advance expectations regarding the (ir) relevant stimuli, because the location of the relevant ring and the shape and color of the relevant object were known in advance, in Experiment 2 no concrete advance expectations could be formed. This was established by varying randomly, from trial to trial, the shape, color, and location of relevant and irrelevant stimuli. We found strong irrelevance-induced blindness in both experiments, regardless of whether or not advance expectations were formed. These findings suggest that advance expectations, at least with regard to the task-relevant stimulus' location shape or color, are not necessary for irrelevance-induced blindness to occur; more generally, this implies that such expectations do not play a critical role in selection processes that are based solely on task relevance. We further discuss these findings in the context of Garnerian and Posnerian selection, and their relationship to visual awareness.

show abstract

“…A third framework that may explain why automatic imitation occurs or fails to occur is the Relevance of Activated Representation (ROAR; Eitam & Higgins, 2010, 2016; Usher et al, 2018). ROAR was conceived as a sketch of a mechanistic explanation for how the external activation of mental content can be unintentionally regulated by the mind.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatically controlled: Task irrelevance fully cancels otherwise automatic imitation.

Hemed¹,

Mark-Tavger²,

Hertz³

et al. 2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automatic imitation refers to the act of unintentionally mimicking observed actions. Inspired by a theoretical framework that allows for controlled yet unintentional processes, we tested whether automatic imitation depends on the task relevance of the to-be-imitated movements. Replicating previous results, we find that movements that are part of the participant's task set unintentionally influence response. Our key finding is that participants generally do not imitate similar and highly familiar movements that are not part of the task set and hence are task-irrelevant. Furthermore, the results of computational data modeling are consistent with the notion that task-relevance modulates the mental activation of information, as posited by the above theoretical framework. Our findings are not predicted and cannot be explained using current accounts of automatic imitation, such as Associative Sequence Learning or Theory of Event Coding. At a broader level, the key contribution of this study is in challenging the empirical basis for automatic imitation by showing that the effects interpreted as imitation occur only for task relevant responses. This pattern lends itself to a different interpretation which is not related to imitation, automatic or otherwise, but rather to the general phenomenon of response compatibility effects.

show abstract

From reaction (‘priming’) to motivated selection: changing conceptualizations of accessibility

Cited by 8 publications

References 31 publications

Consciousness without report: insights from summary statistics and inattention ‘blindness’

Consciousness without report: insights from summary statistics and inattention ‘blindness’

Relevance-based processing: Little role for task-relevant expectations

Automatically controlled: Task irrelevance fully cancels otherwise automatic imitation.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About