Probing the dual-task structure of a metacontrast-masked priming paradigm with subjective visibility judgmentsuse asterix (*) to get italics

Charlott Wendt, Guido HesselmannPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

2024

<p>Experiments contrasting conscious and masked stimulus processing have shaped, and continue to shape, cognitive and neurobiological theories of consciousness. However, as shown by Aru et al. (2012) the contrastive approach builds on the untenable assertion that there are no interactions among the stimulus- and response-related components of a task. While no-report paradigms avoid this violation of pure insertion, it seems necessary to understand the cognitive interactions in other paradigms where the removal of response-related components is not an option. Our research will therefore start from the simple observation that report-based paradigms often qualify as dual-tasking situations.</p> <p>We will investigate the dual-task architecture of the most widely used report-based paradigm in the study of unconscious processing. In masked priming, the prime’s visibility is typically assessed with a subjective measure on a trial-by-trial basis. Despite the inverse order of stimuli (prime-target) and responses (target-prime), and although only the target response is speeded, the experimental setup meets the criteria of a dual-task paradigm. Our aims are twofold: to estimate the influence of response-related parameters on the masked priming effects, and to study the neural underpinnings of our dual-tasking manipulations.</p> <p>In a metacontrast masking experiment using event-related potentials (ERPs), participants will discriminate a target stimulus by quickly pressing one of two keys, and then indicate the subjective visibility of the prime stimulus, either by vocal response or by key-press (factor “modality”). The visibility measure will be a variant of the perceptual awareness scale (PAS) with either two or four items (factor “complexity”). We will investigate in what way response modality and task complexity influence the masked priming effect (i.e., incongruent trials – congruent trials). With regards to the ERPs, we expect that both experimental manipulations are related to the amplitude and latency of the P3b component.&nbsp;</p>

Unconscious Priming, Metacontrast Masking, Dual-task

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Social sciences

Timo Stein [t.stein@uva.nl] suggested: Simon van Gaal, Johannes Fahrenfort, Diane Beck [dmbeck@illinois.edu] suggested: Kyle Mathewson (kmathews@ualberta.ca) , Diane Beck [dmbeck@illinois.edu] suggested: Tony Ro (tro@gc.cuny.edu) , Diane Beck [dmbeck@illinois.edu] suggested: Thorsten Albrecht (Thorsten.Albrecht@biologie.uni-goettingen.de) , Liad Mudrik suggested: Timo Stein <timo.stein@bccn-berlin.de> , Liad Mudrik suggested: Opstal, Filip van <F.vanOpstal@uva.nl>, Mikel Jimenez suggested: Depending on their availability, my colleagues , Mikel Jimenez suggested: Antonio Prieto: antonioprieto@psi.uned.es, or , Mikel Jimenez suggested: Pedro R. Montoro: prmontoro@psi.uned.es , Mikel Jimenez suggested: are suitable reviewers for this registered report. , Mikel Jimenez suggested: Best, , Mikel Jimenez suggested: Mikel, Liad Mudrik suggested: Hi, , Liad Mudrik suggested: I apologize but with ASSC coming up and other deadlines, it will take me some time before I could get to this revision. , Liad Mudrik suggested: Would you like me to suggest alternative reviewers or can you accept my review despite the longer time needed/ , Liad Mudrik suggested: Best, , Liad Mudrik suggested: Liad No need for them to be recommenders of PCI Registered Reports. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

2024-03-02 18:20:03

D. Samuel Schwarzkopf