The effects of attention on perceptual implicit memory

Abstract

Reports on the effects of dividing attention at study on subsequent perceptual priming suggest that perceptual priming is generally unaffected by attentional manipulations as long as word identity is processed. We tested this hypothesis in three experiments by using the implicit word fragment completion and word stem completion tasks. Division of attention was instantiated with the Stroop task in order to ensure the processing of word identity even when the participant's attention was directed to a stimulus attribute other than the word itself. Under these conditions, we found that even though perceptual priming was significant, it was significantly reduced in magnitude. A stem cued recall test in Experiment 2 confirmed a more deleterious effect of divided attention on explicit memory. Taken together, our findings delineate the relative contributions of perceptual analysis and attentional processes in mediating perceptual priming on two ubiquitously used tasks of word fragment completion and word stem completion.

Accurate forced-choice recognition without awareness of memory retrieval

“…Indeed, priming is often unaffected by divided attention despite marked reductions in explicit memory (e.g., Mulligan 1998). Other studies have indicated that divided attention reduces priming to a far lesser extent than explicit memory (e.g., Rajaram et al 2001). These relationships concern implicit memory for perceptual stimulus attributes (perceptual priming), whereas conceptual priming is reduced by divided attention to a similar extent as explicit memory (Mulligan 1998;Light et al 2000).…”

“…We utilized kaleidoscope stimuli such that verbal encoding and retrieval strategies that typically foster response confidence and retrieval awareness were ineffective. To potentially implicate explicit memory, attentional resources during encoding were manipulated, based on prior findings that reduced attention leads to reduced explicit memory, including both recollection, wherein pertinent details from initial stimulus presentation are retrieved, and familiarity, wherein a feeling of recognition occurs without specific episodic retrieval (Mulligan 1998;Rajaram et al 2001;Yonelinas 2001;Curran 2004). Although it might be argued that we used atypical recognition testing circumstances, the properties of our memory tests were similar to those of recognition tests often given to nonhuman animals; stimuli were nearly meaningless and not likely to be remembered using verbal strategies.…”

Interference resolution in retrieval-induced forgetting: Behavioral evidence for a nonmonotonic relationship between interference and forgetting

“…RTs have been used to measure the levels of interference caused by competing representations or processes in a number of paradigms-among others, negative priming (Tipper, 1985), repetition priming (Rajaram, Srinivas, & Travers, 2001), and the stop signal RT task (Logan & Cowan, 1984). Blaxton and Neely (1983) showed that RTs to generate the target exemplar were faster if the participant had first read other exemplars from the same category rather than exemplars from a different category.…”

The effects of divided attention on auditory priming

“…Other studies have reported substantial effects of attentional manipulations on perceptual priming (e.g., Crabb & Dark, 1999Hawley & Johnston, 1991;Rajaram, Srinivas & Travers, 2001;Stone, Ladd, Vaidya, & Gabrieli, 1998). Mulligan (2003a;see also Mulligan, 2002;Mulligan & Hornstein, 2000) identified some of the factors determining whether attentional manipulations affect perceptual priming.…”