Limits...
Subliminal semantic priming in speech.

Daltrozzo J, Signoret C, Tillmann B, Perrin F - PLoS ONE (2011)

Bottom Line: Prime awareness was manipulated by a reduction of sound intensity level.Uncategorized prime words (according to a post-test) were followed by semantically related, unrelated, or repeated target words (presented without intensity reduction) and participants performed a lexical decision task (LDT).Participants with slower reaction times in the LDT showed semantic priming (faster reaction times for semantically related compared to unrelated targets) and negative repetition priming (slower reaction times for repeated compared to semantically related targets).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: CNRS, UMR5292, Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Auditory Cognition and Psychoacoustics Team, Lyon, France. jdaltrozzo@olfac.univ-lyon1.fr

ABSTRACT
Numerous studies have reported subliminal repetition and semantic priming in the visual modality. We transferred this paradigm to the auditory modality. Prime awareness was manipulated by a reduction of sound intensity level. Uncategorized prime words (according to a post-test) were followed by semantically related, unrelated, or repeated target words (presented without intensity reduction) and participants performed a lexical decision task (LDT). Participants with slower reaction times in the LDT showed semantic priming (faster reaction times for semantically related compared to unrelated targets) and negative repetition priming (slower reaction times for repeated compared to semantically related targets). This is the first report of semantic priming in the auditory modality without conscious categorization of the prime.

Show MeSH
Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task – pre-experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the pre-experiment with semantically unrelated, semantically related, and repeated word pairs in slow (N = 12) and fast responders (N = 12) (unit: milliseconds; with SEM).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3105000&req=5

pone-0020273-g001: Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task – pre-experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the pre-experiment with semantically unrelated, semantically related, and repeated word pairs in slow (N = 12) and fast responders (N = 12) (unit: milliseconds; with SEM).

Mentions: Average LDT accuracy was 96.2±0.7%. There was a main effect of Relatedness [F(2,28) = 6.90; p = .004; ηp2 = .330] with better accuracy for semantically related (98.7±0.6%) and repeated word pairs (97.5±0.6%) than for unrelated pairs (92.5±2.2%) (ps<.01). There was no main effect of Rapidity (slow/fast) [p = .22] and no interaction with Relatedness [p = .12]. For RTs (Figure 1), the effect of Relatedness was also significant [F(2,28) = 21.8; p<.001; ηp2 = .609]: RTs were faster for repeated targets (921±38 ms) than for semantically related (1005±38 ms) (p = .003) and unrelated targets (1092±32 ms) (p<.001); RTs were also faster for semantically related versus unrelated targets (p = .002). A main effect of Rapidity [F(1,14) = 28.8; p<.001; ηp2 = .673] confirmed that slow and fast responders' RTs were significantly different. No interaction between Rapidity and Relatedness was observed [p = .67]. These results indicated that our material, when both primes and targets were presented at a comfortable hearing level (60 dB-A), elicited the expected semantic and repetition priming effects.


Subliminal semantic priming in speech.

Daltrozzo J, Signoret C, Tillmann B, Perrin F - PLoS ONE (2011)

Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task – pre-experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the pre-experiment with semantically unrelated, semantically related, and repeated word pairs in slow (N = 12) and fast responders (N = 12) (unit: milliseconds; with SEM).
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3105000&req=5

pone-0020273-g001: Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task – pre-experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the pre-experiment with semantically unrelated, semantically related, and repeated word pairs in slow (N = 12) and fast responders (N = 12) (unit: milliseconds; with SEM).
Mentions: Average LDT accuracy was 96.2±0.7%. There was a main effect of Relatedness [F(2,28) = 6.90; p = .004; ηp2 = .330] with better accuracy for semantically related (98.7±0.6%) and repeated word pairs (97.5±0.6%) than for unrelated pairs (92.5±2.2%) (ps<.01). There was no main effect of Rapidity (slow/fast) [p = .22] and no interaction with Relatedness [p = .12]. For RTs (Figure 1), the effect of Relatedness was also significant [F(2,28) = 21.8; p<.001; ηp2 = .609]: RTs were faster for repeated targets (921±38 ms) than for semantically related (1005±38 ms) (p = .003) and unrelated targets (1092±32 ms) (p<.001); RTs were also faster for semantically related versus unrelated targets (p = .002). A main effect of Rapidity [F(1,14) = 28.8; p<.001; ηp2 = .673] confirmed that slow and fast responders' RTs were significantly different. No interaction between Rapidity and Relatedness was observed [p = .67]. These results indicated that our material, when both primes and targets were presented at a comfortable hearing level (60 dB-A), elicited the expected semantic and repetition priming effects.

Bottom Line: Prime awareness was manipulated by a reduction of sound intensity level.Uncategorized prime words (according to a post-test) were followed by semantically related, unrelated, or repeated target words (presented without intensity reduction) and participants performed a lexical decision task (LDT).Participants with slower reaction times in the LDT showed semantic priming (faster reaction times for semantically related compared to unrelated targets) and negative repetition priming (slower reaction times for repeated compared to semantically related targets).

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: CNRS, UMR5292, Lyon Neuroscience Research Center, Auditory Cognition and Psychoacoustics Team, Lyon, France. jdaltrozzo@olfac.univ-lyon1.fr

ABSTRACT
Numerous studies have reported subliminal repetition and semantic priming in the visual modality. We transferred this paradigm to the auditory modality. Prime awareness was manipulated by a reduction of sound intensity level. Uncategorized prime words (according to a post-test) were followed by semantically related, unrelated, or repeated target words (presented without intensity reduction) and participants performed a lexical decision task (LDT). Participants with slower reaction times in the LDT showed semantic priming (faster reaction times for semantically related compared to unrelated targets) and negative repetition priming (slower reaction times for repeated compared to semantically related targets). This is the first report of semantic priming in the auditory modality without conscious categorization of the prime.

Show MeSH