“阈下”语言启动的意识面:基于可见性测量的元分析和信度分析的系统综述。

Q1 Psychology Journal of Cognition Pub Date : 2025-01-07 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5334/joc.419
David Hernández-Gutiérrez, Miguel A Sorrel, David R Shanks, Miguel A Vadillo
{"title":"“阈下”语言启动的意识面:基于可见性测量的元分析和信度分析的系统综述。","authors":"David Hernández-Gutiérrez, Miguel A Sorrel, David R Shanks, Miguel A Vadillo","doi":"10.5334/joc.419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research on unconscious processing has been a valuable source of evidence in psycholinguistics for shedding light on the cognitive architecture of language. The automaticity of syntactic processing, in particular, has long been debated. One strategy to establish this automaticity involves detecting significant syntactic priming effects in tasks that limit conscious awareness of the stimuli. Criteria for assessing unconscious priming include the visibility (<i>d</i>') of masked words not differing significantly from zero and no positive correlation between visibility and priming. However, such outcomes could also arise for strictly methodological reasons, such as low statistical power in visibility tests or low reliability of dependent measures. In this study, we aimed to address these potential limitations. Through meta-analysis and Bayesian re-analysis, we find evidence of low statistical power and of participants having above-chance awareness of 'subliminal' words. Moreover, we conducted reliability analyses on a dataset from Berkovitch and Dehaene (2019), finding that low reliability in both syntactic priming and visibility tasks may better explain the absence of a significant correlation. Overall, these findings cast doubt on the validity of previous conclusions regarding the automaticity of syntactic processing based on masked priming effects. The results underscore the importance of revisiting the methods employed when exploring unconscious processing in future psycholinguistic research.</p>","PeriodicalId":32728,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognition","volume":"8 1","pages":"13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11720476/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Conscious Side of 'Subliminal' Linguistic Priming: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Reliability Analysis of Visibility Measures.\",\"authors\":\"David Hernández-Gutiérrez, Miguel A Sorrel, David R Shanks, Miguel A Vadillo\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/joc.419\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Research on unconscious processing has been a valuable source of evidence in psycholinguistics for shedding light on the cognitive architecture of language. The automaticity of syntactic processing, in particular, has long been debated. One strategy to establish this automaticity involves detecting significant syntactic priming effects in tasks that limit conscious awareness of the stimuli. Criteria for assessing unconscious priming include the visibility (<i>d</i>') of masked words not differing significantly from zero and no positive correlation between visibility and priming. However, such outcomes could also arise for strictly methodological reasons, such as low statistical power in visibility tests or low reliability of dependent measures. In this study, we aimed to address these potential limitations. Through meta-analysis and Bayesian re-analysis, we find evidence of low statistical power and of participants having above-chance awareness of 'subliminal' words. Moreover, we conducted reliability analyses on a dataset from Berkovitch and Dehaene (2019), finding that low reliability in both syntactic priming and visibility tasks may better explain the absence of a significant correlation. Overall, these findings cast doubt on the validity of previous conclusions regarding the automaticity of syntactic processing based on masked priming effects. The results underscore the importance of revisiting the methods employed when exploring unconscious processing in future psycholinguistic research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cognition\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11720476/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.419\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.419","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

无意识加工研究一直是心理语言学研究语言认知结构的重要证据来源。尤其是句法处理的自动化,长期以来一直备受争议。建立这种自动性的一个策略包括在限制刺激物意识的任务中检测显著的句法启动效应。评估无意识启动的标准包括掩蔽词的可见性(d')与零没有显著差异,可见性与启动之间没有正相关。然而,这种结果也可能是严格意义上的方法学原因造成的,例如可见性测试的统计效力低或依赖度量的可靠性低。在本研究中,我们旨在解决这些潜在的限制。通过荟萃分析和贝叶斯再分析,我们发现了低统计力的证据,以及参与者对“潜意识”词汇的意识高于机会的证据。此外,我们对Berkovitch和Dehaene(2019)的数据集进行了信度分析,发现句法启动和可见性任务的低信度可能更好地解释了缺乏显著相关性的原因。总的来说,这些发现对先前关于基于隐藏启动效应的句法加工自动性的结论的有效性提出了质疑。研究结果强调了在未来的心理语言学研究中,在探索无意识加工时重新审视所采用的方法的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Conscious Side of 'Subliminal' Linguistic Priming: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis and Reliability Analysis of Visibility Measures.

Research on unconscious processing has been a valuable source of evidence in psycholinguistics for shedding light on the cognitive architecture of language. The automaticity of syntactic processing, in particular, has long been debated. One strategy to establish this automaticity involves detecting significant syntactic priming effects in tasks that limit conscious awareness of the stimuli. Criteria for assessing unconscious priming include the visibility (d') of masked words not differing significantly from zero and no positive correlation between visibility and priming. However, such outcomes could also arise for strictly methodological reasons, such as low statistical power in visibility tests or low reliability of dependent measures. In this study, we aimed to address these potential limitations. Through meta-analysis and Bayesian re-analysis, we find evidence of low statistical power and of participants having above-chance awareness of 'subliminal' words. Moreover, we conducted reliability analyses on a dataset from Berkovitch and Dehaene (2019), finding that low reliability in both syntactic priming and visibility tasks may better explain the absence of a significant correlation. Overall, these findings cast doubt on the validity of previous conclusions regarding the automaticity of syntactic processing based on masked priming effects. The results underscore the importance of revisiting the methods employed when exploring unconscious processing in future psycholinguistic research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cognition
Journal of Cognition Psychology-Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Long-term Contingency Learning Depends on Contingency Awareness. I am Once Again Asking for Your Attention: A Replication of Feature-Based Attention Modulations of Binding Effects with Picture Stimuli. Implicit Learning of Parity and Magnitude Associations with Number Color. Exploring Inhibitory Control Processes in Highly Superior Autobiographical Memory (HSAM): A Single Case Study. Readiness for Perception and Action: Towards a More Mechanistic Understanding of Phasic Alertness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1