Measuring the Relative Magnitude of Unconscious Influences
As an alternative to establishing awareness thresholds, stimulus contexts in which there were either greater conscious or greater unconscious influences were defined on the basis of performance on an exclusion task. Target words were presented for brief durations and each target word was followed im...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Consciousness and cognition 1995-12, Vol.4 (4), p.422-439 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 439 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 422 |
container_title | Consciousness and cognition |
container_volume | 4 |
creator | Merikle, Philip M. Joordens, Steve Stolz, Jennifer A. |
description | As an alternative to establishing awareness thresholds, stimulus contexts in which there were either greater conscious or greater unconscious influences were defined on the basis of performance on an exclusion task. Target words were presented for brief durations and each target word was followed immediately by its three-letter stem. Subjects were instructed to complete each stem with any word other than the target word. With this task, failures to exclude target words indicate greater unconscious influences, whereas successful exclusion indicates greater conscious influences. Conscious influences were dominant at long durations (e.g., 241ms), but unconscious influences were dominant at short durations (e.g., 50ms). Performance on the exclusion task successfully predicated both qualitative differences in Stroop priming and qualitative differences in recognition memory previously associated with the different effects of conscious and unconscious influences. Taken together, these results demonstrate that an exclusion task allows both unconscious and conscious influences to be defined in terms of significant deviations from baseline performance. As such, exclusion tasks provide a method for distinguishing conscious from unconscious influences that does not require establishing thresholds for null awareness. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1006/ccog.1995.1049 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85604249</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1053810085710495</els_id><sourcerecordid>85604249</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-d529537da700c8eef28840868a4e20c227e3acd4f58eaf3525ecbefaa8eb6ff63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM9LwzAUx4Moc06v3oQexFtnmiZN4k2GPwYbgrhzyNKXGenambQD_3tTVnYTT-893ud9eXwQus7wNMO4uDem2UwzKVkcqTxB4wxLnJKcF6d9z_JURO4cXYTwhTEWnLIRGgnOMM34GD0sQYfOu3qTtJ-QvEOlW7eHZKk3tWu7EpLGJqvaNHUwrulCMq9t1UFtIFyiM6urAFdDnaDV89PH7DVdvL3MZ4-L1ORStmnJiGQ5LzXH2AgAS4SgWBRCUyDYEMIh16aklgnQNmeEgVmD1VrAurC2yCfo7pC78813B6FVWxcMVJWuIX6kBCswJVT-C3IumBS0T5weQOObEDxYtfNuq_2PyrDqrarequqtqt5qPLgZkrv1FsojPmiM-9thr4PRlfW6Ni4csZwUvMhoxMQBg6hr78CrKLV3WToPplVl4_764BeB95MK</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>77859846</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Measuring the Relative Magnitude of Unconscious Influences</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Merikle, Philip M. ; Joordens, Steve ; Stolz, Jennifer A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Merikle, Philip M. ; Joordens, Steve ; Stolz, Jennifer A.</creatorcontrib><description>As an alternative to establishing awareness thresholds, stimulus contexts in which there were either greater conscious or greater unconscious influences were defined on the basis of performance on an exclusion task. Target words were presented for brief durations and each target word was followed immediately by its three-letter stem. Subjects were instructed to complete each stem with any word other than the target word. With this task, failures to exclude target words indicate greater unconscious influences, whereas successful exclusion indicates greater conscious influences. Conscious influences were dominant at long durations (e.g., 241ms), but unconscious influences were dominant at short durations (e.g., 50ms). Performance on the exclusion task successfully predicated both qualitative differences in Stroop priming and qualitative differences in recognition memory previously associated with the different effects of conscious and unconscious influences. Taken together, these results demonstrate that an exclusion task allows both unconscious and conscious influences to be defined in terms of significant deviations from baseline performance. As such, exclusion tasks provide a method for distinguishing conscious from unconscious influences that does not require establishing thresholds for null awareness.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1053-8100</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1090-2376</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1006/ccog.1995.1049</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8750417</identifier><identifier>CODEN: COCOF9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Cognition ; Consciousness ; Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Mental Recall ; Philosophy ; Psychological Tests ; Reference Values ; Semantics ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Consciousness and cognition, 1995-12, Vol.4 (4), p.422-439</ispartof><rights>1995 Academic Press</rights><rights>1996 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-d529537da700c8eef28840868a4e20c227e3acd4f58eaf3525ecbefaa8eb6ff63</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ccog.1995.1049$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3267614$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8750417$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Merikle, Philip M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joordens, Steve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stolz, Jennifer A.</creatorcontrib><title>Measuring the Relative Magnitude of Unconscious Influences</title><title>Consciousness and cognition</title><addtitle>Conscious Cogn</addtitle><description>As an alternative to establishing awareness thresholds, stimulus contexts in which there were either greater conscious or greater unconscious influences were defined on the basis of performance on an exclusion task. Target words were presented for brief durations and each target word was followed immediately by its three-letter stem. Subjects were instructed to complete each stem with any word other than the target word. With this task, failures to exclude target words indicate greater unconscious influences, whereas successful exclusion indicates greater conscious influences. Conscious influences were dominant at long durations (e.g., 241ms), but unconscious influences were dominant at short durations (e.g., 50ms). Performance on the exclusion task successfully predicated both qualitative differences in Stroop priming and qualitative differences in recognition memory previously associated with the different effects of conscious and unconscious influences. Taken together, these results demonstrate that an exclusion task allows both unconscious and conscious influences to be defined in terms of significant deviations from baseline performance. As such, exclusion tasks provide a method for distinguishing conscious from unconscious influences that does not require establishing thresholds for null awareness.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Consciousness</subject><subject>Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mental Recall</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Psychological Tests</subject><subject>Reference Values</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1053-8100</issn><issn>1090-2376</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1995</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkM9LwzAUx4Moc06v3oQexFtnmiZN4k2GPwYbgrhzyNKXGenambQD_3tTVnYTT-893ud9eXwQus7wNMO4uDem2UwzKVkcqTxB4wxLnJKcF6d9z_JURO4cXYTwhTEWnLIRGgnOMM34GD0sQYfOu3qTtJ-QvEOlW7eHZKk3tWu7EpLGJqvaNHUwrulCMq9t1UFtIFyiM6urAFdDnaDV89PH7DVdvL3MZ4-L1ORStmnJiGQ5LzXH2AgAS4SgWBRCUyDYEMIh16aklgnQNmeEgVmD1VrAurC2yCfo7pC78813B6FVWxcMVJWuIX6kBCswJVT-C3IumBS0T5weQOObEDxYtfNuq_2PyrDqrarequqtqt5qPLgZkrv1FsojPmiM-9thr4PRlfW6Ni4csZwUvMhoxMQBg6hr78CrKLV3WToPplVl4_764BeB95MK</recordid><startdate>19951201</startdate><enddate>19951201</enddate><creator>Merikle, Philip M.</creator><creator>Joordens, Steve</creator><creator>Stolz, Jennifer A.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19951201</creationdate><title>Measuring the Relative Magnitude of Unconscious Influences</title><author>Merikle, Philip M. ; Joordens, Steve ; Stolz, Jennifer A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c399t-d529537da700c8eef28840868a4e20c227e3acd4f58eaf3525ecbefaa8eb6ff63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1995</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Consciousness</topic><topic>Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mental Recall</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Psychological Tests</topic><topic>Reference Values</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Merikle, Philip M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Joordens, Steve</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stolz, Jennifer A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Consciousness and cognition</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Merikle, Philip M.</au><au>Joordens, Steve</au><au>Stolz, Jennifer A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Measuring the Relative Magnitude of Unconscious Influences</atitle><jtitle>Consciousness and cognition</jtitle><addtitle>Conscious Cogn</addtitle><date>1995-12-01</date><risdate>1995</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>422</spage><epage>439</epage><pages>422-439</pages><issn>1053-8100</issn><eissn>1090-2376</eissn><coden>COCOF9</coden><abstract>As an alternative to establishing awareness thresholds, stimulus contexts in which there were either greater conscious or greater unconscious influences were defined on the basis of performance on an exclusion task. Target words were presented for brief durations and each target word was followed immediately by its three-letter stem. Subjects were instructed to complete each stem with any word other than the target word. With this task, failures to exclude target words indicate greater unconscious influences, whereas successful exclusion indicates greater conscious influences. Conscious influences were dominant at long durations (e.g., 241ms), but unconscious influences were dominant at short durations (e.g., 50ms). Performance on the exclusion task successfully predicated both qualitative differences in Stroop priming and qualitative differences in recognition memory previously associated with the different effects of conscious and unconscious influences. Taken together, these results demonstrate that an exclusion task allows both unconscious and conscious influences to be defined in terms of significant deviations from baseline performance. As such, exclusion tasks provide a method for distinguishing conscious from unconscious influences that does not require establishing thresholds for null awareness.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>8750417</pmid><doi>10.1006/ccog.1995.1049</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1053-8100 |
ispartof | Consciousness and cognition, 1995-12, Vol.4 (4), p.422-439 |
issn | 1053-8100 1090-2376 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85604249 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Adult Cognition Consciousness Epistemology. Philosophy of science. Theory of knowledge Female Humans Male Mental Recall Philosophy Psychological Tests Reference Values Semantics Time Factors |
title | Measuring the Relative Magnitude of Unconscious Influences |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T11%3A30%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Measuring%20the%20Relative%20Magnitude%20of%20Unconscious%20Influences&rft.jtitle=Consciousness%20and%20cognition&rft.au=Merikle,%20Philip%20M.&rft.date=1995-12-01&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=422&rft.epage=439&rft.pages=422-439&rft.issn=1053-8100&rft.eissn=1090-2376&rft.coden=COCOF9&rft_id=info:doi/10.1006/ccog.1995.1049&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E85604249%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=77859846&rft_id=info:pmid/8750417&rft_els_id=S1053810085710495&rfr_iscdi=true |