Semantic priming and identification of near threshold primes in a lexical decision task

Three experiments examined both the impact of semantic analysis of 50-msec, masked visual primes on a target response and the impact of semantic analysis of the target on a prime response. The first two experiments used a prime-target interval of 1000 msec. In Experiment 1, subjects reported the identity of each prime: (a) after a lexical decision about the target, (b) both before and after a lexical decision, or (c) after a target detection response. Prime report after both types of target response showed retroactive priming in which report was facilitated by related targets and inhibited by unrelated targets. Analyses of lexical decision latency and accuracy conditionalized on prime report showed that semantic priming was restricted to reported related primes. In Experiment 2, subjects made no overt response to the primes. Priming was conditionalized on recognition of the primes on a subsequent test. The pattern was the same as Experiment 1: There was priming only for recognized primes; recognition memory showed a pattern consistent with retroactive priming. Experiment 3 also conditionalized priming on recognition performance but used a prime-target interval of only 250 msec. Again, semantic priming was found only for recognized primes, and recognition memory revealed retroactive priming. Retroactive priming indicates an interdependency between prime and target processing that needs to be incorporated into models of semantic priming.     

Recalibration by pairing: a process of perceptual learning.

When two cues which normally agree in determining perceived depth are experimentally paired so that they designate discrepant values for the depth dimension, an opportunity is created for the recalibration or re-evaluation of the cues. Experiments which show recalibration of the oculomotor cues and recalibration of binocular disparity as a result of pairing these cues with other discrepant cues are reviewed. The locus of change is related to the relative dominance of different cues and the contribution of allocation of attention in determining dominance is discussed. Implications of recalibration by pairing for understanding ontogenetic development are considered. It is suggested that some cues may acquire their effectiveness as a consequence of pairing during development.