Response priming driven by local contrast, not subjective brightness

Schmidt, Thomas; Miksch, Sandra; Bulganin, Lisa; Jäger, Florian; Lossin, Felix; Jochum, Joline; Kohl, Peter

doi:10.1167/10.7.419

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In another demonstration of a double dissociation, we used a visual lightness illusion ( Adelson, 1993 ) in conjunction with a response priming task ( Schmidt et al, 2010 ). Participants responded to a pair of target patches, one light and one dark, by pressing a key on the side of the lighter target.…”

Section: Alternatives: Qualitative and Double Dissociationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invisible Stimuli, Implicit Thresholds: Why Invisibility Judgments Cannot be Interpreted in Isolation

Schmidt¹

2015

ACP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some studies of unconscious cognition rely on judgments of participants stating that they have “not seen” the critical stimulus (e.g., in a masked-priming experiment). Trials in which participants gave invisibility judgments are then treated as those where the critical stimulus was “subliminal” or “unconscious,” as opposed to trials with higher visibility ratings. Sometimes, only these trials are further analyzed, for instance, for unconscious priming effects. Here I argue that this practice requires implicit assumptions about subjective measures of awareness incompatible with basic models of categorization under uncertainty (e.g., modern signal-detection and threshold theories). Most importantly, it ignores the potential effects of response bias. Instead of taking invisibility judgments literally, they would better be employed in parametric experiments where stimulus visibility is manipulated systematically, not accidentally. This would allow studying qualitative and double dissociations between measures of awareness and of stimulus processing per se.

show abstract

Section: Alternatives: Qualitative and Double Dissociationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invisible Stimuli, Implicit Thresholds: Why Invisibility Judgments Cannot be Interpreted in Isolation

Schmidt¹

2015

ACP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, if participants are responding to primes and targets that are based on perceptual grouping, strong perceptual grouping allows for a steeper priming function than weaker grouping. This way, different grouping principles can be compared with respect to their visuomotor processing dynamics (Schmidt & Schmidt, 2010b). Similarly, visual attention to locations or features can steepen the slope of the priming function (Schmidt & Schmidt, 2010a; Schmidt & Seydell, 2008), just like low-level stimulus variables such as color saturation do (Schmidt et al, 2006).…”

Section: Utilizing the Time-courses Of Masking And Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Schmidt et al (2010) reported a double dissociation between priming effects and the subjective appearance of the prime in a visual brightness illusion, showing that under specific circumstances one prime may look brighter than the other but prime responses as if it was darker (and vice versa). This dissociation was achieved without any masking, with all stimuli clearly visible.…”

Section: Utilizing the Time-courses Of Masking And Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So far, we used response priming as a method to investigate visual awareness and online motor control (e.g., Schmidt, 2002), visual attention (Schmidt & Schmidt, 2010a; Schmidt & Seydell, 2008), brightness processing (Schmidt et al, 2010), and natural image processing (Schmidt & Schmidt, 2009). Currently, we are further extending our research interests by using the response priming method to investigate such different topics as visual processing of transparency, processing advantages of phobic stimuli, illusory contours, figure-ground segregation, and perceptual grouping (see Schmidt et al, 2011, for some examples).…”

Section: Grand Designsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dos and don'ts in response priming research

Schmidt¹,

Haberkamp²,

Schmidt³

2011

Advances in Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response priming is a well-understood but sparsely employed paradigm in cognitive science. The method is powerful and well-suited for exploring early visuomotor processing in a wide range of tasks and research fields. Moreover, response priming can be dissociated from visual awareness, possibly because it is based on the first sweep of feedforward processing of primes and targets. This makes it a theoretically interesting device for separating conscious and unconscious vision. We discuss the major opportunities of the paradigm and give specific recommendations (e.g., tracing the time-course of priming in parametric experiments). Also, we point out typical confounds, design flaws, and data processing artifacts.

show abstract

“…In another demonstration of a double dissociation, we used a visual lightness illusion (Adelson, 1993) in conjunction with a response priming task (Schmidt, Miksch, Bulganin, Jäger, Lossin, Jochum, & Kohl, 2010). Participants responded to a pair of targets, one light and one dark, by pressing a key on the side of the lighter target.…”

Section: Alternatives: Qualitative and Double Dissociationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invisible stimuli, implicit thresholds: Why invisibility judgments cannot be interpreted in isolation

Schmidt¹

2013

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response priming driven by local contrast, not subjective brightness

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Invisible Stimuli, Implicit Thresholds: Why Invisibility Judgments Cannot be Interpreted in Isolation

Invisible Stimuli, Implicit Thresholds: Why Invisibility Judgments Cannot be Interpreted in Isolation

Dos and don'ts in response priming research

Invisible stimuli, implicit thresholds: Why invisibility judgments cannot be interpreted in isolation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About