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 - priming phase of the main experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the priming phase of the main 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-g002: Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task - priming phase of the main experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the priming phase of the main experiment with semantically unrelated, semantically related, and repeated word pairs in slow (N = 12) and fast responders (N = 12) (unit: milliseconds; with SEM).

Mentions: In the priming phase, the overall LDT accuracy was high (93.9±0.7%) and there was no significant effect of Relatedness nor an interaction between Relatedness and Rapidity (ps>.17). For correct RTs (Figure 2), the interaction between Relatedness and Rapidity (slow/fast) was significant [F(2,44) = 3.54; p = .04; ηp2 = .139]. For slow responders only, RTs were smaller for semantically related targets (1105±29 ms) than for unrelated (1153±28 ms) (p = .034) and repeated targets (1166±28 ms) (p = .008). RTs did not differ between unrelated and repeated targets (p = .549). For the fast responders, no significant differences were observed (ps>.470). In addition, a main effect of Rapidity [F(1,22) = 19.8; p<.001; ηp2 = .474] confirmed that slow and fast responders' RTs were significantly different.


Subliminal semantic priming in speech.

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

Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task - priming phase of the main experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the priming phase of the main 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-g002: Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task - priming phase of the main experiment.Correct Reaction Times at the lexical decision task in the priming phase of the main experiment with semantically unrelated, semantically related, and repeated word pairs in slow (N = 12) and fast responders (N = 12) (unit: milliseconds; with SEM).
Mentions: In the priming phase, the overall LDT accuracy was high (93.9±0.7%) and there was no significant effect of Relatedness nor an interaction between Relatedness and Rapidity (ps>.17). For correct RTs (Figure 2), the interaction between Relatedness and Rapidity (slow/fast) was significant [F(2,44) = 3.54; p = .04; ηp2 = .139]. For slow responders only, RTs were smaller for semantically related targets (1105±29 ms) than for unrelated (1153±28 ms) (p = .034) and repeated targets (1166±28 ms) (p = .008). RTs did not differ between unrelated and repeated targets (p = .549). For the fast responders, no significant differences were observed (ps>.470). In addition, a main effect of Rapidity [F(1,22) = 19.8; p<.001; ηp2 = .474] confirmed that slow and fast responders' RTs were significantly different.

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