Abstract
There has been a discrepancy among past studies with regard to the relation between negative priming and familiarity of stimuli. That is, Malley and Strayer (1995; Strayer & Grison, 1999) reported that the more familiar the stimuli were, the larger negative priming became (i.e., a positive correlation), whereas DeSchepper and Treisman (1996; Treisman & DeSchepper, 1996) reported that the less familiar the stimuli were, the larger negative priming became (i.e., a negative correlation). These studies differ not only in their experimental tasks (identification vs. matching) but also in their respective manners of arranging unfamiliar stimuli (pure vs. mixed). In the present study, using an identical set of stimuli, we examined whether these factors caused the opposite results. An identification task with a pure arrangement produced a positive correlation, and a matching task with a mixed arrangement produced a negative correlation. These results suggest that the past opposing results are both replicable and that they have reflected the different causal mechanisms of negative priming.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Dalrymple-Alford, E. C., &Budayr, B. (1966). Examination of some aspects of the Stroop color-word test.Perceptual & Motor Skills,23, 1211–1214.
DeSchepper, B., &Treisman, A. (1996). Visual memory for novel shapes: Implicit coding without attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 27–47.
Fox, E. (1995). Negative priming from ignored distractors in visual selection: A review.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,2, 145–173.
Frith, U. (1974). A curious effect with reversed letters explained by a theory of schema.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 113–116.
Grison, S., &Strayer, D. L. (2001). Negative priming and perceptual fluency: More than what meets the eye.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 1063–1071.
Houghton, G., &Tipper, S. P. (1994). A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.),Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 53–112). San Diego: Academic Press.
Houghton, G., Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., &Shore, D. I. (1996). Inhibition and interference in selective attention: Some tests of a neural network model.Visual Cognition,3, 119–164.
Johnston, W. A., Hawley, K. J., Plewe, S. H., Elliott, J. M. G., &DeWitt, M. J. (1990). Attention capture by novel stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,119, 397–411.
Johnston, W. A., Schwarting, I. S., &Hawley, K. J. (1996). Novel pop-out, perceptual inhibition, and the stability-plasticity dilemma. In A. F. Kramer, M. G. H. Coles, & G. D. Logan (Eds.),Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention (pp. 315–335). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Kane, M. J., May, C. P., Hasher, L., Rahhal, T., &Stoltzfus, E. R. (1997). Dual mechanisms of negative priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 632–650.
Loula, F., Kourtzi, Z., &Shiffrar, M. (2000). Surface segmentation cues influence negative priming for novel and familiar shapes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 929–944.
MacDonald, P. A., Joordens, S., &Seergobin, K. N. (1999). Negative priming effects that are bigger than a breadbox: Attention to distractors does not eliminate negative priming, it enhances it.Memory & Cognition,27, 197–207.
Malley, G. B., &Strayer, D. L. (1995). Effect of stimulus repetition on positive and negative identity priming.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 657–667.
May, C. P., Kane, M. J., &Hasher, L. (1995). Determinants of negative priming.Psychological Bulletin,118, 35–54.
Milliken, B., Joordens, S., Merikle, P. M., &Seiffert, A. E. (1998). Selective attention: A reevaluation of the implications of negative priming.Psychological Review,105, 203–229.
Milliken, B., Tipper, S. P., &Weaver, B. (1994). Negative priming in a spatial localization task: Feature mismatching and distractor inhibition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 624–646.
Neill, W. T. (1977). Inhibitory and facilitatory processes in selective attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,3, 444–450.
Neill, W. T., Lissner, L. S., &Beck, J. L. (1990). Negative priming insame-different matching: Further evidence for a central locus of inhibition.Perception & Psychophysics,48, 398–400.
Neill, W. T., &Valdes, L. A. (1992). Persistence of negative priming: Steady state or decay?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 565–576.
Neill, W. T., &Valdes, L. A. (1996). Facilitatory and inhibitory aspects of attention. In A. F. Kramer, M. G. H. Coles, & G. D. Logan (Eds.),Converging operations in the study of visual selective attention (pp. 77–106). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Neill, W. T., Valdes, L. A., &Terry, K. M. (1995). Selective attention and the inhibitory control of cognition. In F. N. Dempster & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.),Interference and inhibition in cognition (pp. 207–261). San Diego: Academic Press.
Neill, W. T., Valdes, L. A., Terry, K. M., &Gorfein, D. S. (1992). Persistence of negative priming: II. Evidence for episodic trace retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 993–1000.
Neumann, E., &DeSchepper, B. G. (1992). An inhibition-based fan effect: Evidence for an active suppression mechanism in selective attention.Canadian Journal of Psychology,46, 1–40.
Reicher, G. M., Snyder, C. R. R., &Richards, J. T. (1976). Familiarity of background characters in visual scanning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 522–530.
Richards, J. T., &Reicher, G. M. (1978). The effect of background familiarity in visual search: An analysis of underlying factors.Perception & Psychophysics,23, 499–505.
Strayer, D. L., &Grison, S. (1999). Negative identity priming is contingent on stimulus repetition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 24–38.
Tipper, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory priming by ignored objects.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,37A, 571–590.
Tipper, S. P. (2001). Does negative priming reflect inhibitory mechanisms? A review and integration of conflicting views.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,54A, 321–343.
Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., &Houghton, G. (1994). Behavioural goals determine inhibitory mechanisms of selective attention.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,47A, 809–840.
Treisman, A., &DeSchepper, B. (1996). Object tokens, attention, and visual memory. In T. Inui & J. L. McClelland (Eds.),Attention and performance XVI: Information integration in perception and communication (pp. 15–46). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wang, Q., Cavanagh, P., &Green, M. (1994). Familiarity and pop-out in visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,56, 495–500.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This study was supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B) 11410024, awarded to K.Y. by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. We are indebted to Yohtaro Takano for his warm support at the early stages of this study, and to Ewald Neumann and David Strayer for their very helpful comments on earlier versions of this article. Portions of this study were reported at the annual meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, April 2000, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nagai, JI., Yokosawa, K. Negative priming and stimulus familiarity: What causes opposite results?. Memory & Cognition 31, 369–379 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194395
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194395