Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The reversal of perceptual and motor compatibility effects differs qualitatively between metacontrast and random-line masks

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In masked priming tasks, participants typically respond faster to compatible than to incompatible primes, an effect that has been dubbed as the positive compatibility effect (PCE). However, when the interval between the prime and the mask is relatively long, responses are faster to incompatible than to compatible primes. This inversion is called the negative compatibility effect (NCE). Two main origins of the NCE have been proposed. The object-updating theory holds that when the masks share stimulus features with the primes, both perceptual and motor processes generate an NCE. As an example, for masks composed of overlaid left and right prime arrows, the NCE is thought to be positive priming induced by the arrow of the mask pointing in the opposite direction of the prime. In contrast, the motor inhibition theories hold that the origin of the NCE is purely motor and can be demonstrated when masks do not share features with primes. To test both hypotheses, the present study aims at delineating the respective contributions of perceptual and motor components of the NCE in the context of different types of masks. Consistent with the object-updating hypothesis, we found both perceptual and motor NCEs at the long SOA with metacontrast masks (with internal contours corresponding to left and right overlaid arrows). Consistent with the motor inhibition hypothesis, we found motor NCE but no perceptual NCE at the long SOA with random-line masks (containing no prime features). The study thus suggests that the origin of the NCE depends on the type of mask.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For arrow stimuli, the relevant perceptual information is the orientation of the arrowhead, not the orientation of the lines that composed the head. By saying even more “visually different”, we refer to the orientation of the arrowhead. As a matter of fact, in RespConflict 180° trials, prime and target are composed of lines with identical orientation (a line rotated by 180° has the same orientation as a non-rotated line), only the spatial arrangement of the lines relative to each other differs. In contrast, in RespConflict 90° trials, the lines making up the target are at a 90° angle to those making up the prime. However, this is not the relevant perceptual information in the task. Also, the prime and target were never presented in the same location so that the influence of low-level similarity of line orientation is reduced.

  2. Because participants started each block by pressing the spacebar of the keyboard and then responded to target by choosing between the two extreme keys of the button box, the RT of the very first trial was affected by the changing of device. For this reason, it was systematically not analyzed.

References

  • Atas, A., Vermeiren, A., & Cleeremans, A. (2013). Repeating a strongly masked stimulus increases priming and awareness. Consciousness and Cognition, 22(4), 1422–1430.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, H., Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2006). A neural network model of inhibitory processes in subliminal priming. Visual Cognition, 13(4), 401–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boy, F., Evans, C. J., Edden, R. A., Singh, K. D., Husain, M., & Sumner, P. (2010a). Individual differences in subconscious motor control predicted by GABA concentration in SMA. Current Biology, 20(19), 1779–1785.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boy, F., Husain, M., Singh, K. D., & Sumner, P. (2010b). Supplementary motor area activations in unconscious inhibition of voluntary action. Experimental Brain Research, 206(4), 441–448.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boy, F., Husain, M., & Sumner, P. (2010c). Unconscious inhibition separates two forms of cognitive control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 107(24), 11134–11139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boy, F., & Sumner, P. (2010). Tight coupling between positive and reversed priming in the masked prime paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(4), 892–905.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boy, F., & Sumner, P. (2014). Visibility predicts priming within but not between people: a cautionary tale for studies of cognitive individual differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1011–1025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S., & Changeux, J. P. (2011). Experimental and theoretical approaches to conscious processing. Neuron, 70(2), 200–227.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Le Clec, H. G., Koechlin, E., Mueller, M., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., et al. (1998). Imaging unconscious semantic priming. Nature, 395(6702), 597–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eimer, M. (1999). Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of masked prime stimuli on motor activation and behavioural performance. Acta Psychology (Amsterdam), 101(2–3), 293–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(6), 1737–1747.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2002). Links between conscious awareness and response inhibition: evidence from masked priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 514–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2003). Response facilitation and inhibition in subliminal priming. Biological Psychology, 64(1–2), 7–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrand, L. (1996). The masked repetition priming effect dissipates when increasing the inter-stimulus interval: evidence from word naming. Acta Psychologica, 91(1), 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G., Draine, S. C., & Abrams, R. L. (1996). Three cognitive markers of unconscious semantic activation. Science, 273(5282), 1699–1702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jaśkowski, P. (2008). The negative compatibility effect with nonmasking flankers: a case for mask-triggered inhibition hypothesis. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(3), 765–777.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jaśkowski, P., Bialunska, A., Tomanek, M., & Verleger, R. (2008). Mask- and distractor-triggered inhibitory processes in the priming of motor responses: an EEG study. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 70–85.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jaśkowski, P., & Przekoracka-Krawczyk, A. (2005). On the role of mask structure in subliminal priming. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars), 65(4), 409–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaśkowski, P., & Verleger, R. (2007). What determines the direction of subliminal priming. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3(1–2), 181–192.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C. Y., & Blake, R. (2005). Psychophysical magic: rendering the visible ‘invisible’. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(8), 381–388.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klapp, S. T. (2005). Two versions of the negative compatibility effect: comment on Lleras and Enns (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134(3), 431–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klapp, S. T., & Hinkley, L. B. (2002). The negative compatibility effect: unconscious inhibition influences reaction time and response selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131(2), 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klotz, W., & Neumann, O. (1999). Motor activation without conscious discrimination in metacontrast masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 976–992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kouider, S., & Dehaene, S. (2007). Levels of processing during non-conscious perception: a critical review of visual masking. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 362(1481), 857–875.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kouider, S., & Dehaene, S. (2009). Subliminal number priming within and across the visual and auditory modalities. Experimental Psychology, 56(6), 418–433.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krüger, D., Klapötke, S., & Mattler, U. (2011). PRP-paradigm provides evidence for a perceptual origin of the negative compatibility effect. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(3), 866–881.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lingnau, A., & Vorberg, D. (2005). The time course of response inhibition in masked priming. Perception and Psychophysics, 67(3), 545–557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lleras, A., & Enns, J. T. (2004). Negative compatibility or object updating? A cautionary tale of mask-dependent priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(4), 475–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lleras, A., & Enns, J. T. (2006). How much like a target can a mask be? Geometric, spatial, and temporal similarity in priming: a reply to Schlaghecken and Eimer (2006). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(3), 495–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattler, U. (2006). On the locus of priming and inverse priming effects. Perception and Psychophysics, 68(6), 975–991.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McBride, J., Boy, F., Husain, M., & Sumner, P. (2012). Automatic motor activation in the executive control of action. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 82.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Naccache, L., Blandin, E., & Dehaene, S. (2002). Unconscious masked priming depends on temporal attention. Psychological Science, 13(5), 416–424.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, O., & Klotz, W. (1994). Motor responses to nonreportable, masked stimuli: Where is the limit of direct parameter specification? In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 123–150). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieuwenhuis, S., Forstmann, B. U., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2011). Erroneous analyses of interactions in neuroscience: a problem of significance. Nature Neuroscience, 14(9), 1105–1107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nigbur, R., Cohen, M. X., Ridderinkhof, K. R., & Sturmer, B. (2012). Theta dynamics reveal domain-specific control over stimulus and response conflict. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(5), 1264–1274.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Praamstra, P., & Seiss, E. (2005). The neurophysiology of response competition: motor cortex activation and inhibition following subliminal response priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(3), 483–493.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Raghunathan, T. E., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1996). Comparing correlated but nonoverlapping correlations. Psychological Methods, 1, 178–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2000). A central-peripheral asymmetry in masked priming. Perception and Psychophysics, 62(7), 1367–1382.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2002). Motor activation with and without inhibition: evidence for a threshold mechanism in motor control. Perception and Psychophysics, 64(1), 148–162.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2004). Masked prime stimuli can bias “free” choices between response alternatives. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(3), 463–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2006). Active masks and active inhibition: a comment on Lleras and Enns (2004) and on Verleger, Jaśkowski, Aydemir, van der Lubbe, and Groen (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(3), 484–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlaghecken, F., Klapp, S. T., & Maylor, E. A. (2009). Either or neither, but not both: locating the effects of masked primes. Proceedings in Biological Sciences, 276(1656), 515–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seiss, E., & Praamstra, P. (2004). The basal ganglia and inhibitory mechanisms in response selection: evidence from subliminal priming of motor responses in Parkinson’s disease. Brain, 127(Pt 2), 330–339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sumner, P. (2007). Negative and positive masked-priming: implications for motor inhibition. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 317–326.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Sumner, P. (2008). Mask-induced priming and the negative compatibility effect. Experimental Psychology (formerly “Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie”), 55(2), 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sumner, P., Nachev, P., Morris, P., Peters, A. M., Jackson, S. R., Kennard, C., et al. (2007). Human medial frontal cortex mediates unconscious inhibition of voluntary action. Neuron, 54(5), 697–711.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Gaal, S., & Lamme, V. A. (2012). Unconscious high-level information processing: implication for neurobiological theories of consciousness. Neuroscientist, 18(3), 287–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Veen, V., & Carter, C. S. (2002). The timing of action-monitoring processes in the anterior cingulate cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(4), 593–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Veen, V., Cohen, J. D., Botvinick, M. M., Stenger, V. A., & Carter, C. S. (2001). Anterior cingulate cortex, conflict monitoring, and levels of processing. Neuroimage, 14(6), 1302–1308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Verleger, R., Jaśkowski, P., Aydemir, A., van der Lubbe, R. H. J., & Groen, M. (2004). Qualitative Differences Between Conscious and Nonconscious Processing? On Inverse Priming Induced by Masked Arrows. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(4), 494–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vorberg, D., Mattler, U., Heinecke, A., Schmidt, T., & Schwarzbach, J. (2003). Different time courses for visual perception and action priming. Proceedings of National Academic Science USA, 100(10), 6275–6280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

Anne Atas is a postdoctoral researcher funded by the F.R.S.-FNRS, which also supports Estibaliz San Anton (as a research fellow) and Axel Cleeremans (as a research director). This research was partly funded by Interuniversity Poles of Attraction Grant P7/33 from the Belgian Science Policy Office (BELSPO).

Conflict of interests

The authors declared that they had no conflicts of interest with respect to their authorship or the publication of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Research in Cognition and Neurosciences (CRCN), Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

    Anne Atas, Estibaliz San Anton & Axel Cleeremans

  2. ULB Neuroscience Institute (UNI), Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium

    Anne Atas, Estibaliz San Anton & Axel Cleeremans

  3. Consciousness, Cognition and Computation Group (CO3), Université libre de Bruxelles, Av. F. Roosevelt 50/191, 1050, Brussels, Belgium

    Anne Atas, Estibaliz San Anton & Axel Cleeremans

Authors
  1. Anne Atas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Estibaliz San Anton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Axel Cleeremans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne Atas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Atas, A., San Anton, E. & Cleeremans, A. The reversal of perceptual and motor compatibility effects differs qualitatively between metacontrast and random-line masks. Psychological Research 79, 813–828 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0611-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0611-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation