![]() All participants were right-handed according to the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, native French speakers, and did not report any hearing problems or history of neurological disease. įorty-five volunteers were tested: 16 in a pre-experiment (12 females, 22.1☐.4 years) and 29 others in the main experiment. The prime categorization was used as a measure of prime awareness, as in previous studies –, , including those investigating the auditory modality. We took into account the specificity of the auditory domain by contrasting fast- with slow-responders' performance and we predicted faster response-times (in a lexical decision task) to semantically primed target words presented at low sound intensity for the group of slow-responders.Īfter the priming experiment, a prime categorization test (word/pseudo-word) was presented to check that participants were unable to categorize the low-intensity primes. the random variability in participants' neural responses to sensory stimuli, ). in competition with the internal noise (i.e. Here, we investigated auditory subliminal repetition and semantic priming by using primes presented at low intensity, i.e. For instance, phonological or conceptual priming studies have reported contextual facilitation for slow responders but not for fast responders when prime processing required a long processing time, either because of the auditory modality or because of the task difficulty –. This is in line with Wundt's early prediction that auditory priming might be sensitive to participants' response speed and is consistent with more recent research –. Hence, if a participant responds rather fast, priming might be attenuated because of an incomplete processing of the prime. This domain specificity suggests that in an auditory subliminal priming experiment, primes may not be fully perceived before the participants' response when (a) participants are asked to perform a task as fast as possible, (b) the duration between primes and targets is very short, and (c) primes are difficult to perceive. In addition, processing is lengthened in the auditory domain as compared to the visual domain, , notably because of the greater number of relays in the ascending auditory pathway. Unlike visual words, which can be fully presented in a short time window (without distortion), spoken words require time for presentation/pronunciation. Studying auditory subliminal priming requires adaptations of the experimental design because of the sequential nature of speech presentation and because of longer processing times in the auditory compared to the visual domain. by using masked and time-compressed primes, Kouider and Dupoux reported subliminal repetition priming for speech, but no subliminal semantic priming. More recently, by transferring the visual subliminal priming paradigm to the auditory domain, i.e. ![]() However, most of these studies reported contradictory results, allowing no clear conclusions. Similarly to the visual modality, masking techniques (e.g., white noise) have been used to reduce prime awareness. In the auditory modality, subliminal perception has been considerably less investigated. Other studies have shown phonological and semantic effects with this paradigm –, but some of them have received severe criticisms, notably because no index of prime awareness was provided (see, for reviews). In these conditions, visual orthographic and morphological priming have been observed. In the visual modality, a method for studying subliminal processing consists in the presentation of stimuli in a subliminal priming paradigm: the prime word is presented for a short time (usually less than 50 ms) and is surrounded by a forward and/or a backward visual mask. This might be due to the complex questions this research domain has to face: in particular, how to demonstrate the absence of consciousness and how to measure unconscious effects. Unlike studies of implicit word processing, studies of subliminal word processing are rather rare. The extent to which words can be processed unconsciously has been a topic of considerable debate.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |