Top-down modulation of unconscious 'automatic' processes: A gating framework

• Authors: Markus Kiefer

Abstracts

EN

In classical theories of automaticity, automatic processes are usually thought to occur autonomously and independently of higher level top-down factors (e.g., Posner & Snyder, 1975). However, already Neumann (1984) pointed out that the cognitive system has to be configured in a certain way for automatic processes to occur. In extension of his work, I propose a gating framework to account for the influence of top-down factors such as attention, intention and task set on automatic processes such as masked response or semantic priming. It is assumed that task representations held in prefrontal cortex regulate the gain of neurons in visual and sematic association cortex thereby modulating the effects of unconsciously perceived masked stimuli on further 'automatic' information processing steps. In support of the postulated gating framework, recent studies demonstrated a top-down modulation of automatic processes. Behavioral and electro-physiological studies with the masked response priming and semantic priming paradigms show that masked priming effects crucially depend (i) on temporal attention to the masked prime, (ii) on intentions or action plans and (iii) on the task set active immediately before masked prime presentation. For instance, masked semantic priming was only observed when the preceding task set required the orientation to semantic word features, but not when it required orientation to perceptual word features. These results support the view that unconscious automatic processes are modulated by top-down factors. They are suggestive of a gating mechanism which orchestrates the conscious and unconscious information processing streams.

Keywords

EN

automatic processes; unconscious perception; masked semantic; priming; masked response priming; top-down control

• Publisher: Wyższa Szkoła Finansów i Zarządzania w Warszawie
• Journal: Advances in Cognitive Psychology
• Year: 2007
• Volume: 3
• Issue: 1-2
• Pages: 289-306

Contributors

author

Markus Kiefer

• Department of Psychiatry, University of Ulm, Germany

References

• Abrams, R. L., & Greenwald, A. G. (2000). Parts outweigh the whole (word) in unconscious analysis of meaning.Psychological Science, 11, 118-124.[PubMed]
• Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In Umilta, C., & Moscovitch, M. (Eds.),Attention and Performance 15: Conscious and Nonconscious Information Processing. Attention and Performance Series(pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press.
• Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1973).Human associative memory. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Press.
• Ansorge, U. (2004). Top-down contingencies of nonconscious priming revealed by dual-task interference.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 1123-1148.[PubMed]
• Ansorge, U., Heumann, M., & Scharlau, I. (2002). Influences of visibility, intentions, and probability in a peripheral cuing task.Consciousness and Cognition, 11, 528-545.[PubMed]
• Ansorge, U., & Horstmann, G. (2007). Preemptive control of attentional capture by colour: Evidence from trial-by-trial analyses and orderings of onsets of capture effects in reaction time distributions.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 952-975.[PubMed]
• Ansorge, U., & Neumann, O. (2005). Intentions determine the effect of invisible metacontrast-masked primes: Evidence for top-down contingencies in a peripheral cueing task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 762-777.[PubMed]
• Ansorge, U., Neumann, O., Becker, S., Kälberer, H., & Cruse, H. (2007). Sensorimotor supremacy: Investigating conscious and unconscious vision by masked priming.Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 257-274.http://www.ac-psych.org/index.php?id=2&rok=2007&issue=1-2#article_53
• Bargh, J. A. (1989). Conditional automaticity: Varieties of automatic influence in social perception and cognition. In Uleman, J. S., & Bargh, J. A. (Eds.),Unintended Thought(pp. 3-51). New York: The Guilford Press.
• Bentin, S., Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1995). Semantic processing and memory for attended and unattended words in dichotic listening: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 54-67.[PubMed]
• Bentin, S., McCarthy, G., & Wood, C. C. (1985). Event-related potentials, lexical decision, and se mantic priming.Electroencephalography and clinical Neurophysiology, 60, 343-355.[PubMed]
• Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the N400: Evidence from masked priming.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 33-44.
• Carr, T. H., & Dagenbach, D. (1990). Semantic priming and repetition priming from masked words: Evidence for a center-surround attentional mechanism in perceptual recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 16, 341-350.[PubMed]
• Chiappe, P. R., Smith, M. C., & Besner, D. (1996). Semantic priming in visual word recognition: Activation blocking and domains of processing.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 249-253.
• Chwilla, D. J., Brown, C. M., & Hagoort, P. (1995). The N400 as a function of the level of processing.Psychophysiology, 32, 274-285.[PubMed]
• Cohen, J. D., & Servan-Schreiber, D. (1992). Context, cortex, and dopamine: A connectionist approach to behavior and biology in schizophrenia.Psychological Review, 99, 45-77.[PubMed]
• Damian, M. F. (2001). Congruity effects evoked by subliminally presented primes: Automaticity rather than semantic processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 154-165.[PubMed]
• Deacon, D., Hewitt, S., Chien-Ming, Y., & Nagata, M. (2000). Event-related potential indices of semantic priming using masked and unmasked words: Evidence that the N400 does not reflect a post-lexical process.Cognitive Brain Research, 9, 137-146.
• Deacon, D., & Shelley-Tremblay, J. (2000). How automatically is meaning accessed: A review of the effects of attention on semantic processing.Frontiers in Bioscience, 5, E82-94.[PubMed]
• Dehaene, S., Changeux, J. P., Naccache, L., Sackur, J., & Sergent, C. (2006). Conscious, preconscious, and subliminal processing: A testable taxonomy.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 204-211.[PubMed]
• Dehaene, S., & Naccache, L. (2001). Towards a cognitive neuroscience of consciousness: Basic evidence and a workspace framework.Cognition, 17, 1-37.[PubMed]
• Dehaene, S., Naccache, L., LeClec'H, G., Koechlin, E., Mueller, M., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., et al. (1998). Imaging unconscious priming.Nature, 395, 597-600.[PubMed]
• Di Lollo, V., Enns, J. T., & Rensink, R. A. (2000). Competition for consciousness among visual events: The psychophysics of reentrant visual processes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 481-507.[PubMed]
• Eckstein, D., & Perrig, W. J. (2007). The influence of intention on masked priming: A study with semantic classification of words.Cognition, 104, 345-376.[PubMed]
• Enns, J. T., & Di Lollo, V. (2000). What's new in visual masking.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 345-352.[PubMed]
• Friederici, A. D., Hahne, A., & Mecklinger, A. (1996). Temporal structure of syntactic parsing: Early and late event-related potentials.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 1219-1248.[PubMed]
• Fuentes, L. J., Carmona, E., & Agis, I. F. (1994). The role of the anterior attention system in semantic processing of both foveal and parafoveal words.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 6, 17-25.
• Gilbert, S. J., & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: A PDP model.Cognitive Psychology, 44, 297-337.[PubMed]
• Goschke, T. (2002). Volition und kognitive Kontrolle [Volition and cognitive control]. In J. Müsseler & W. Prinz (Eds.),Lehrbuch der Allgemeinen Psychologie[Textbook for General Psychology] (pp. 271-321). Heidelberg: Springer.
• Greenwald, A. G., Draine, S. C., & Abrams, R. L. (1996). Three cognitive markers of unconscious semantic activation.Science, 273, 1699-1702.[PubMed]
• Hamker, F. H. (2005). The reentry hypothesis: The putative interaction of the frontal eye field, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, and areas V4, IT for attention and eye movement.Cerebral Cortex, 15, 431-447.[PubMed]
• Holcomb, P. J., & Neville, H. J. (1990). Auditory and visual semantic priming in lexical decision: A comparison using event-related potentials. Language andCognitive Process, 5, 281-312.
• Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information.Psychological Research, 55, 270-279.
• Hommel, B. (2000). The prepared reflex: Automaticity and control in stimulus-response translation. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Attention and performance 18: Control of Cognitive Processes. Attention and performance series(pp. 247-273). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 513-541.
• Jaśkowski, P., Skalska, B., & Verleger, R. (2003). How the self controls its "automatic pilot" when processing subliminal information.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 911-920.[PubMed]
• Kellenbach, M. L., & Michie, P. T. (1996). Modulation of event-related potentials by semantic priming: Effects of color-cued selective attention.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 155-173.
• Kentridge, R. W., Heywood, C. A., & Weiskrantz, L. (1999). Effects of temporal cueing on residual visual discrimination in blindsight.Neuropsychologia, 37, 479-483.[PubMed]
• Kentridge, R. W., Heywood, C. A., & Weiskrantz, L. (2004). Spatial attention speeds discrimination without awareness in blindsight.Neuropsychologia, 42, 831-835.[PubMed]
• Kiefer, M. (2001). Perceptual and semantic sources of category-specific effects in object categorization: Event-related potentials during picture and word categorization.Memory & Cognition, 29, 100-116.[PubMed]
• Kiefer, M. (2002a). Bewusstsein (Consciousness). In J. Müsseler & W. Prinz (Eds.),Lehrbuch der Allgemeinen Psychologie (Textbook for General Psychology) (pp. 176-222). Heidelberg: Spektrum, Akademischer Verlag.
• Kiefer, M. (2002b). The N400 is modulated by unconsciously perceived masked words: Further evidence for an automatic spreading activation account of N400 priming effects.Cognitive Brain Research, 13, 27-39.[PubMed]
• Kiefer, M. (2005). Repetition priming modulates category-related effects on event-related potentials: Further evidence for multiple cortical semantic systems.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 199-211.[PubMed]
• Kiefer, M. (2006, March). Top-down Modulation automatischer Prozesse durch Aufgabeneinstellungen [Top-down modulation of automatic processes by task sets]. Paper presented at the TeaP, Meinz, Germany.
• Kiefer, M., & Brendel, D. (2006). Attentional modulation of unconscious 'automatic' processes: Evidence from event-related potentials in a masked priming paradigm.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 184-198.[PubMed]
• Kiefer, M., & Spitzer, M. (2000). Time course of conscious and unconscious semantic brain activation.NeuroReport, 11, 2401-2407.[PubMed]
• Kiefer, M., Weisbrod, M., Kern, I., Maier, S., & Spitzer, M. (1998). Right hemisphere activation during indirect semantic priming: Evidence from event-related potentials.Brain and Language, 64, 377-408.[PubMed]
• Kiesel, A., Kunde, W., & Hoffmann, J. (2007a). Unconscious priming according to multiple S-R rules.Cognition, 104, 89-105.[PubMed]
• Kiesel, A., Kunde, W., & Hoffmann, J. (2007b). Mechanisms of subliminal priming.Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 307-315.http://www.ac-psych.org/index.php?id=2&rok=2007&issue=1-2#article_56
• Klinger, M. R., Burton, P. C., & Pitts, G. S. (2000). Mechanisms of unconscious priming: I Response competition, not spreading activation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26, 441-455.[PubMed]
• Klotz, W., & Neumann, O. (1999). Motor activation without conscious discrimination in metacontrast masking.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 976-992.
• Koivisto, M. (1998). Categorical priming in the cerebral hemispheres: Automatic in the left hemisphere, postlexical in the right hemisphere?Neuropsychologia, 36, 661-668.[PubMed]
• Kunde, W., Kiesel, A., & Hoffmann, J. (2003). Conscious control over the content of unconscious cognition.Cognition, 88, 223-242.[PubMed]
• Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity.Science, 207, 203-205.[PubMed]
• Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1984). Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association.Nature, 307, 1161-1163.[PubMed]
• Logan, G. D. (1989). Automaticity and cognitive control. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.),Unintended thought(pp. 52-74). New York: Guilford Press.
• Luck, S. J., Vogel, E. K., & Shapiro, K. L. (1996). Word meanings can be accessed but not reported during the attentional blink.Nature, 383, 616-618.[PubMed]
• Marcel, A. J. (1983). Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking and word recognition.Cognitive Psychology, 15, 197-237.[PubMed]
• Mari-Beffa, P., Houghton, G., Estevez, A. F., & Fuentes, L. J. (2000). Word-based grouping affects the prime-task effect on semantic priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 469-479.[PubMed]
• Mari-Beffa, P., Valdes, B., Cullen, D. J., Catena, A., & Houghton, G. (2005). ERP analyses of task effects on semantic processing from words.Cognitive Brain Research, 23, 293-305.[PubMed]
• Meiran, N. (2000). Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching. In Monsell, S., & Driver, J. (Eds.),Attention and performance 18: Control of Cognitive Processes. Attention and performance series(pp. 377-399). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Merikle, P. M., & Joordens, S. (1997). Parallels between perception without attention and perception without awareness.Consciousness and Cognition, 6, 219-236.[PubMed]
• Merikle, P. M., Joordens, S., & Stolz, J. A. (1995). Measuring the relative magnitude of unconscious influences.Consciousness and Cognition, 4, 422-439.[PubMed]
• Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (1995).The visual brain in action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Naccache, L., Blandin, E., & Dehaene, S. (2002). Unconscious masked priming depends on temporal attention.Psychological Science, 13, 416-424.[PubMed]
• Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.),Basic progresses in reading - Visual word recognition(pp. 264-333). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Neumann, O. (1984). Automatic processing: A review of recent findings and a plea for an old theory. In W. Prinz & A. F. Sanders (Eds.),Cognition and motor processes(pp. 245-293). Berlin: Springer.
• Neumann, O. (1990). Direct parameter specification and the concept of perception.Psychological Research, 52, 207-215.[PubMed]
• Nobre, A. C., & McCarthy, G. (1995). Language-related field potentials in the anterior-medial temporal lobe: II. Effects of word type and semantic priming.Journal of Neuroscience, 15, 1090-1098.[PubMed]
• Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.),Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium(pp. 55-85). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207-231.
• Rolke, B., Heil, M., Streb, J., & Henninghausen, E. (2001). Missed prime words within the attentional blink evoke an N400 semantic priming effect.Psychophysiology, 38, 165-174.[PubMed]
• Scharlau, I. (2007). Temporal processes in prime-mask interaction: Assessing perceptual consequences of masked information.Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 241-255.http://www.ac-psych.org/index.php?id=2&rok=2007&issue=1-2#article_52
• Schneider, W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: 1. Detection, search, and attention.Psychological Review, 84, 1-66.
• Stolz, J. A., & Besner, D. (1996). Role of set in visual word recognition: Activation and activation blocking as nonautomatic processes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 1166-1177.
• Treue, S., & Martínez Trujillo, J. C. (1999). Feature-based attention influences motion processing gain in macaque visual cortex.Nature, 399, 575-579.[PubMed]
• Vandenberghe, R., Price, C., Wise, R., Josephs, O., & Frackowiak, R. S. J. (1996). Functional anatomy of a common semantic system for words and pictures.Nature, 383, 254-256.[PubMed]
• Velmans, M. (1991). Is human information processing conscious?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 651-726.
• Vogel, E. K., Luck, S. J., & Shapiro, K. L. (1998). Electrophysiological evidence for a postperceptual locus of suppression during the attentional blink.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1656-1674.[PubMed]
• Vorberg, D., Mattler, U., Heinecke, A., Schmidt, T., & Schwarzbach, J. (2003). Different time courses for visual perception and action priming.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 100, 6275-6280.[PubMed]
• Vorberg, D., Mattler, U., Heinecke, A., Schmidt, T., & Schwarzbach, J. (2004). Invariant time-course of priming with and without awareness. In C. Kaernbach, E. Schröger & H. Müller (Eds.),Psychophysics beyond sensation: Laws and invariants of human cognition(pp. 271-288). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Wolbers, T., Schoell, E. D., Verleger, R., Kraft, S., McNamara, A., Jaśkowski, P., et al. (2006). Changes in connectivity profiles as a mechanism for strategic control over interfering subliminal information.Cerebral Cortex, 16, 857-864.[PubMed]

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10053-008-0031-2