CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 57Philosophy and Theoretical ScienceNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Advancing research on unconscious priming: when can scientists claim an indirect task advantage?

Open access
Meyen, Sascha, Zerweck, Iris A., Amado, Catarina, von Luxburg, Ulrike, Franz, Volker H.·2022·Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
DOI 10.1037/xge0001065
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Current literature holds that many cognitive functions can be performed outside consciousness. Evidence for this view comes from unconscious priming. In a typical experiment, visual stimuli are masked such that participants are close to chance performance when directly asked to which of two categories the stimuli belong. This close-to-zero sensitivity is seen as evidence that participants cannot consciously report the category of the masked stimuli. Nevertheless, the category of the masked stimuli can indirectly affect responses to other stimuli (e.g., reaction times or brain activity)-an effect called priming. The priming effect is seen as evidence for a higher sensitivity to the masked stimuli in the indirect responses as compared with the direct responses. Such an apparent difference in sensitivities is taken as evidence that processing occurred unconsciously. But we show that this "standard reasoning of unconscious priming" is flawed: Sensitivities are not properly compared, creating the wrong impression of a difference in sensitivities even if there is none. We describe the appropriate way to determine sensitivities, replicate the behavioral part of a landmark study, develop methods to estimate sensitivities from reported summary statistics of published studies, and use these methods to reanalyze 15 highly influential studies. Results show that the interpretations of many studies need to be changed and that a community effort is required to reassess the vast literature on unconscious priming. This process will allow scientists to learn more about the true boundary conditions of unconscious priming, thereby advancing the scientific understanding of consciousness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/xge0001065

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The double t-test approach is fundamentally flawed.

    “However, this approach is fundamentally flawed (Nieuwenhuis et al. 2011, Meyen et al. 2022).”

    From Evidence for unconscious priming using a Bayesian single-subject approach (2026) · cites this paper as Meyen et al. 2022

  • In a proper statistical framework, priming and prime awareness should be compared directly on the same scale and within the same statistical test.

    “Instead, in a proper statistical framework, priming and prime awareness should be compared directly on the same scale and within the same statistical test (Meyen et al. 2022, Stein et al. 2024).”

    From Evidence for unconscious priming using a Bayesian single-subject approach (2026) · cites this paper as Meyen et al. 2022

  • The statistically proper way to compare awareness and priming effects is to directly compare both effects to establish an indirect task advantage.

    “The statistically proper way to compare the awareness and priming effects is to directly compare both effects to establish what has been dubbed an ‘indirect task advantage’”

    From Evidence for unconscious priming using a Bayesian single-subject approach (2026) · cites this paper as Meyen et al. 2022

  • Recoding RT data of the mask discrimination task as accuracy using the median-split technique allowed direct testing of prime discrimination and priming effect within the same scale and statistical test.

    “we recoded the RT data of the mask discrimination task as accuracy using the median-split technique”

    From Evidence for unconscious priming using a Bayesian single-subject approach (2026) · cites this paper as Meyen et al. 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

  • The Cost of Dichotomization

    Cohen, J. (1983) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/014662168300700301 · Cited by 1,564 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Since participants have some continuous sense (confidence) about their responses (Rausch, Hellmann, & Zehetleitner, 2018; Zehetleitner & Rausch, 2013), the binary response format forces them to discard this information (Cohen, 1983), which further decreases the statistical power in the direct task.”
    Background

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Barnett, A. G., van der Pols, J. C., & Dobson, A. J. (2004). Regression to the mean: What it is and how to deal with it. International Journal of Epidemiology , 34 (1), 215-220.
  2. Boring, E. G. (1919). Mathematical vs. scientific significance. Psychological Bulletin , 16 (10), 335-338.
  3. Buchner, A., & Wippich, W. (2000). On the reliability of implicit and explicit memory measures. Cognitive Psychology , 40 (3), 227-259.
  4. Damian, M. F. (2001). Congruity e ects evoked by subliminally presented primes: Automaticity rather than semantic processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 27 , 154165.
  5. Dehaene, S., Lau, H., & Kouider, S. (2017). What is consciousness, and could machines have it? Science , 358 (6362), 486-492.
  6. Dell'Acqua, R., & Grainger, J. (1999). Unconscious semantic priming from pictures. Cognition , 73 (1), B1-B15.
  7. de Zilva, D., Vu, L., Newell, B. R., & Pearson, J. (2013). Exposure is not enough: Suppressing stimuli from awareness can abolish the mere exposure e ect. PLoS ONE , 8 (10), e77726.
  8. Dijksterhuis, A., Bos, M. W., Nordgren, L. F., & Van Baaren, R. B. (2006). On making the right choice: The deliberation-without-attention e ect. Science , 311 (5763), 1005-1007.
  9. Dulaney, D. E., & Eriksen, C. W. (1959). Accuracy of brightness discrimination as measured by concurrent verbal responses and GSRs. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 59 , 418-423.
  10. Eriksen, C. W. (1960). Discrimination and learning without awareness-a methodological survey and evaluation. Psychological Review , 67 , 279-300.
  11. Finkbeiner, M. (2011). Subliminal priming with nearly perfect performance in the prime-classification task. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics , 73 (4), 12551265.
  12. Franz, V. H., & Gegenfurtner, K. R. (2008). Grasping visual illusions: Consistent data and no dissociation. Cognitive Neuropsychology , 25 (7), 920-950.
  13. Franz, V. H., & von Luxburg, U. (2015). No evidence for unconscious lie detection: A significant di erence does not imply accurate classification. Psychological Science , 26 (10), 1646-1648.
  14. Hannula, D. E., Simons, D. J., & Cohen, N. J. (2005). Imaging implicit perception: promise and pitfalls. Nature Reviews Neuroscience , 6 (3), 247-255.
  15. Janssen, P. A., Thiessen, P., Klein, M. C., Whitfield, M. F., MacNab, Y. C., & Cullis-Kuhl, S. C. (2007). Standards for the measurement of birth weight, length and head circumference at term in neonates of european, chinese and south asian ancestry. Open Medicine , 1 (2), E74-E88.
  16. Klotz, W., & Neumann, O. (1999). Motor activation without conscious discrimination in metacontrast masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 25 (4), 976-992.
  17. Kouider, S., & Dehaene, S. (2007). Levels of processing during non-conscious perception: a critical review of visual masking. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 362 , 857-875.
  18. Kunde, W., Kiesel, A., & Ho mann, J. (2003). Conscious control over the content of unconscious cognition. Cognition , 88 (2), 223-242.
  19. Kunst-Wilson, W. R., & Zajonc, R. B. (1980). A ective discrimination of stimuli that cannot be recognized. Science , 207 (4430), 557-558.
  20. Mattler, U. (2003). Priming of mental operations by masked stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics , 65 (2), 167-187.
  21. Mattler, U. (2005). Inhibition and decay of motor and nonmotor priming. Perception & Psychophysics , 67 (2), 285-300.
  22. Merikle, P. M. (1992). Perception without awareness: Critical issues. American Psychologist , 47 (6), 792.
  23. Morris, J. S., Öhman, A., & Dolan, R. J. (1999). A subcortical pathway to the right amygdala mediating 'unseen' fear. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 96 , 1680-1685.
  24. Morrison, D., & Henkel, R. (Eds.). (1970). The Significance Test Controversy . New Brunswick; NJ: Aldine Transaction.
  25. Naccache, L., Blandin, E., & Dehaene, S. (2002). Unconscious masked priming depends on temporal attention. Psychological Science , 13 (5), 416-424.
  26. Palfi, B., & Dienes, Z. (2020). Why Bayesian 'evidence for H 1' in one condition and Bayesian 'evidence for H 0' in another condition does not mean good-enough Bayesian evidence for a di erence between the conditions. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science , 3 (3), 300-308.
  27. Rausch, M., Hellmann, S., & Zehetleitner, M. (2018). Confidence in masked orientation judgments is informed by both evidence and visibility. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics , 80 (1), 134-154.
  28. Reingold, E. M., & Merikle, P. M. (1988). Using direct and indirect measures to study perception without awareness. Perception & Psychophysics , 44 (6), 563-575.
  29. Reingold, E. M., & Merikle, P. M. (1990). On the interrelatedness of theory and measurement in the study of unconscious processes. Mind & Language , 5 (1), 9-28.
  30. Schmidt, T. (2002). The fingers in flight: Real-time control by visually masked color stimuli. Psychological Science , 13 (2), 112-118.
  31. Schmidt, T. (2015). Invisible stimuli, implicit thresholds: Why invisibility judgments cannot be interpreted in isolation. Advances in Cognitive Psychology , 11 (2), 31.
  32. Seamon, J. G., Brody, N., & Kau , D. M. (1983). A ective discrimination of stimuli that are not recognized: E ects of shadowing, masking, and cerebral laterality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 9 (3), 544.
  33. Shanks, D. R. (2017). Regressive research: The pitfalls of post hoc data selection in the study of unconscious mental processes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 24 (3), 752-775.
  34. Simons, D. J., Hannula, D. E., Warren, D. E., & Day, S. W. (2007). Behavioral, neuroimaging, and neuropsychological approaches to implicit perception. The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness , 207-250.
  35. Sklar, A. Y., Levy, N., Goldstein, A., Mandel, R., Maril, A., & Hassin, R. R. (2012). Reading and doing arithmetic nonconsciously. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 109 , 19614-19619.
  36. Sumner, P. (2008). Mask-induced priming and the negative compatibility e ect. Experimental Psychology , 55 (2), 133-141.
  37. ten Brinke, L., Stimson, D., & Carney, D. R. (2014). Some evidence for unconscious lie detection. Psychological Science , 25 (5), 1098-1105.
  38. Vadillo, M. A., Konstantinidis, E., & Shanks, D. R. (2016). Underpowered samples, false negatives, and unconscious learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 23 (1), 87-102.
  39. Vadillo, M. A., Linssen, D., Orgaz, C., Parsons, S., & Shanks, D. R. (2020). Unconscious or underpowered? probabilistic cuing of visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 149 (1), 160.
  40. van den Bussche, E., van den Noortgate, W., & Reynvoet, B. (2009). Mechanisms of masked priming: A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin , 135 , 452-477.
  41. van Gaal, S., Ridderinkhof, K. R., Scholte, H. S., & Lamme, V. A. (2010). Unconscious activation of the prefrontal no-go network. Journal of Neuroscience , 30 (11), 4143-4150.
  42. Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, P., Di, M., Gong, Y., & Tan, M. (2017). The role of representation strength of the prime in subliminal visuomotor priming. Experimental Psychology , 64 (6), 422-431.
  43. Wicherts, J. M., Borsboom, D., Kats, J., & Molenaar, D. (2006). The poor availability of psychological research data for reanalysis. American Psychologist , 61 (7), 726-728.
  44. Wójcik, M. J., Nowicka, M. M., Bola, M., & Nowicka, A. (2019). Unconscious detection of one's own image. Psychological Science , 30 (4), 471-480.
  45. Zehetleitner, M., & Rausch, M. (2013). Being confident without seeing: what subjective measures of visual consciousness are about. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics , 75 (7), 1406-1426.
  46. Zerweck, I. A., Kao, C.-S., Meyen, S., Amado, C., von Eltz, M., Klimm, M., & Franz, V. H. (in press). No evidence for superior unconscious processing of digits. Department of Computer Science, University of Tübingen.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Meyen, S., Zerweck, I. A., Amado, C., von Luxburg, U., & Franz, V. H.
Affiliations
University of Tübingen (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2022-01
Volume
151
Issue
1
Pages
65-81
ISSN
  • 0096-3445 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2222
DOI
10.1037/xge0001065
OpenAlex
W3170956390
Cited by
57
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3
FWCI
7.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology General (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Open Science Framework
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
  • Institutional Strategy of University of Tübingen
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
unconscious priming, masked stimuli, sensitivity estimation, conscious processing, replication
MeSH terms
Consciousness, Humans, Motor Activity, Perceptual Masking, Reaction Time, Unconscious, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review