Abstract
Whether higher-level visual processing of visual objects can occur without awareness remains controversial. Here, the sandwich masking procedure and event-related potential (ERP) were applied to investigate the unconscious processing of visual objects. The behavioral results indicated that sandwich masking successfully eliminated visual awareness of the masked images. The ERP results revealed that early visual processing, which was reflected by the N/P100 effect, was preserved in the absence of visual awareness. However, higher-level visual processing was eliminated by sandwich masking. The present study suggests that the unconscious processing of visual objects is limited to early visual processing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bar, M., & Biederman, I. (1998). Subliminal visual priming. Psychological Science, 9(6), 464–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00086.
Brown, C., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the N400: Evidence from masked priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1993.5.1.34.
Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., Cohen, L., Le Bihan, D., Mangin, J.-F., Poline, J.-B., & Rivière, D. (2001). Cerebral mechanisms of word masking and unconscious repetition priming. Nature Neuroscience, 4(7), 752–758. https://doi.org/10.1038/89551.
Dehaene, S., Changeux, J. P., Naccache, L., Sackur, J., & Sergent, C. (2006). Conscious, preconscious, and subliminal processing: A testable taxonomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(5), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.03.007.
Dehaene, S., Charles, L., King, J.-R., & Marti, S. (2014). Toward a computational theory of conscious processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 25, 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2013.12.005.
Dell'Acqua, R., & Grainger, J. (1999). Unconscious semantic priming from pictures. Cognition, 73(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960701579839.
Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009.
Delphine, P., & Dominic, F. (2003). The neural correlates of conscious vision. Cerebral Cortex, 13(5), 461–474. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/13.5.461.
Eddy, M. D., & Holcomb, P. J. (2009). Electrophysiological evidence for size invariance in masked picture repetition priming. Brain and Cognition, 71(3), 397–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2009.05.006.
Eddy, M., & Holcomb, P. (2010). The temporal dynamics of masked repetition picture priming effects: Manipulations of stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) and prime duration. Brain Research, 1340(1), 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2010.04.024.
Eddy, M. D., & Holcomb, P. J. (2011). Invariance to rotation in depth measured by masked repetition priming is dependent on prime duration. Brain Research, 1424(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2011.09.036.
Eddy, M., Schmid, A., & Holcomb, P. J. (2006). Masked repetition priming and event-related brain potentials: A new approach for tracking the time-course of object perception. Psychophysiology, 43(6), 564–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00455.x.
Fahrenfort, J. J., Scholte, H. S., & Lamme, V. A. (2007). Masking disrupts reentrant processing in human visual cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(9), 1488–1497. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.9.1488.
Forster, K. I., Davis, C., Schoknecht, C., & Carter, R. (1987). Masked priming with graphemically related forms: Repetition or partial activation? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39(2), 211–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640748708401785.
Forster, K. I., Mohan, K., Hector, J., Kinoshita, S., & Lupker, S. (2003). The mechanics of masked priming. In S. Kinoshita & S. Lupker (Eds.), Masked priming: The state of the art (pp. 3–37). Psychology Press.
Friedman, D., Sutton, S., Putnam, L., Brown Jr., C., & Erlenmeyer-Kimling, L. (1988). ERP components in picture matching in children and adults. Psychophysiology, 25(5), 570–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1988.tb01893.x.
Groppe, D. M., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2011). Mass univariate analysis of event-related brain potentials/fields I: A critical tutorial review. Psychophysiology, 48(12), 1711–1725. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01273.x.
Harris, J. A., Wu, C. T., & Woldorff, M. G. (2011). Sandwich masking eliminates both visual awareness of faces and face-specific brain activity through a feedforward mechanism. Journal of Vision, 11(7), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1167/11.7.3.
Harris, J. A., McMahon, A. R., & Woldorff, M. G. (2013). Disruption of visual awareness during the attentional blink is reflected by selective disruption of late-stage neural processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(11), 1863–1874. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00443.
Hesselmann, G., Darcy, N., Rothkirch, M., & Sterzer, P. (2018). Investigating masked priming along the “vision-for-perception” and “vision-for-action” dimensions of unconscious processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(11), 1641–1659. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000420.
Kiefer, M. (2002). The N400 is modulated by unconsciously perceived masked words: Further evidence for an automatic spreading activation account of N400 priming effects. Cognitive Brain Research, 13(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0926-6410(01)00085-4.
Klinger, M. R., Burton, P. C., & Pitts, G. S. (2000). Mechanisms of unconscious priming: I. response competition, not spreading activation. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory & Cognition, 26(2), 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.2.441.
Koivisto, M., & Grassini, S. (2016). Neural processing around 200 ms after stimulus-onset correlates with subjective visual awareness. Neuropsychologia, 84, 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.02.024.
Koivisto, M., Revonsuo, A., & Lehtonen, M. (2006). Independence of visual awareness from the scope of attention: An electrophysiological study. Cerebral Cortex, 16(3), 415–424. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhi121.
Kouider, S., & Dehaene, S. (2007). Levels of processing during non-conscious perception: A critical review of visual masking. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 362(1481), 857–875. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2093.
Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP). Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 621–647. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.131123.
Li, B., Gao, C., & Wang, J. (2019). Electrophysiological correlates of masked repetition and conceptual priming for visual objects. Brain and Behavior, 9, e01415. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1415.
Liu, B., Wang, Z., & Li, J. (2011). The influence of matching degrees of synchronous auditory and visual information in videos of real-world events on cognitive integration: An event-related potential study. Neuroscience, 194, 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.08.009.
Lopez-Calderon, J., & Luck, S, J. (2014). ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00213.
Losier, T., Lefebvre, C., Doro, M., Dell'Acqua, R., & Jolicœur, P. (2017). Backward masking interrupts spatial attention, slows downstream processing, and limits conscious perception. Consciousness and Cognition, 54, 101–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.04.005.
McCarthy, G., & Wood, C. C. (1985). Scalp distributions of event-related potentials: An ambiguity associated with analysis of variance models. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 62(3), 203–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-5597(85)90015-2.
Pitts, M. A., Metzler, S., & Hillyard, S. A. (2014). Isolating neural correlates of conscious perception from neural correlates of reporting one's perception. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1078. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01078.
Polich, J., & Kok, A. (1995). Cognitive and biological determinants of P300: An integrative review. Biological Psychology, 41(2), 103–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-0511(95)05130-9.
Rutiku, R., Aru, J., & Bachmann, T. (2016). General markers of conscious visual perception and their timing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10, 23. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00023.
Sergent, C., Baillet, S., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Timing of the brain events underlying access to consciousness during the attentional blink. Nature Neuroscience, 8(10), 1391–1400. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn1549.
Stein, T., Utz, V., & Van Opstal, F. (2020). Unconscious semantic priming from pictures under backward masking and continuous flash suppression. Consciousness and Cognition, 78, 102864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2019.102864.
Sutton, S., Braren, M., Zubin, J., & John, E. (1965). Evoked-potential correlates of stimulus uncertainty. Science, 150(3700), 1187–1188. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.150.3700.1187.
Van den Bussche, E., Notebaert, K., & Reynvoet, B. (2009). Masked primes can be genuinely semantically processed: A picture prime study. Experimental Psychology, 56(5), 295–300. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.56.5.295.
Voss, J. L., Baym, C. L., & Paller, K. A. (2008). Accurate forced-choice recognition without awareness of memory retrieval. Learning and Memory, 15(6), 454–459. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.971208.
Wilding, E. L. (2006). The practice of rescaling scalp-recorded event-related potentials. Biological Psychology, 72(3), 325–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2005.12.002.
Yang, Y.-H., Zhou, J., Li, K.-A., Hung, T., Pegna, A. J., & Yeh, S.-L. (2017). Opposite ERP effects for conscious and unconscious semantic processing under continuous flash suppression. Consciousness and Cognition, 54, 114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.05.008.
Zhang, X. L., Begleiter, H., Porjesz, B., & Litke, A. (1997). Visual object priming differs from visual word priming: An ERP study. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 102(3), 200–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(96)95172-3.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31700954) and Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20170234).
Data Availability (Data Transparency)
The data and material of this study are available on reasonable request from the corresponding author.
Funding
(information that explains whether and by whom the research was supported)
This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31700954) and Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province (BK20170234).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
(include appropriate disclosures)
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Ethics Approval
(include appropriate approvals or waivers)
The experiment protocol was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Jiangsu Normal University.
Consent to Participate
(include appropriate statements)
All subjects gave written informed consent.
Consent for Publication
(include appropriate statements)
Not applicable.
Code Availability (Software Application or Custom Code)
EEGlab and ERPlab were used for ERP analysis.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, B., Jiang, L. Electrophysiological correlates associated with the processing of invisible and visible visual objects. Curr Psychol 41, 8481–8489 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01329-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01329-4