Do Subliminally Presented Objects Potentiate Motor Responses?

Zissis Pappas, Arien Mack

Abstract


The dorsal visual stream has been implicated in visually guided motor behavior (Milner & Goodale, 1996). Can objects that are nondetectable (subliminal) activate the dorsal stream? Using the stimulus-response compatibility paradigm, a physical correspondence between stimulus and response yields faster reaction times (RTs), we briefly presented images of objects that afford a motor response: common graspable objects (Study 1; reaching and grasping) and indexical pointer finger (Study 2; orienting eye movement). When the orientation of the object and the response side were congruent, RTs were significantly faster than when they were incongruent even though the objects were not detected. This finding suggests that the dorsal stream processes information about the orientation of stimuli that are not consciously perceived and is consistent with the spared ability of blindsight patients.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2001). Response facilitation and inhibition in manual, vocal, and oculomotor performance: Evidence for a modality-unspecific mechanism. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 16-26.

Gibson, J. J. (1979/1987). Ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Goodale, M.A., Milner, A.D., Jakobson, L.S., & Carey, D.P. (1991). A neurological dissociation between perceiving objects and grasping them. Nature, 349, 154-156.

Jeeves, M. A., & Dixon, N. F. (1970). Hemisphere differences in response rates to visual stimuli. Psychonomic Science, 20, 249-251.

Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). The visual brain in action. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Mishkin, M., & Ungerleider, L. G., & Macko, K. A. (1983). Object vision and spatial vision: Two cortical pathways. Trends in Neurosciences, 6, 414-417.

Norman, J. (2002). Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 73-144.

Schlaghecken, F., & Eimer, M. (2000). A central/peripheral asymmetry in subliminal priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1367-1382.

Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (1998). On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 830-846.

Watanabe, K. (2002). Reflexive attentional shift caused by indexical pointing gesture. Journal of Vision, 2, 435a.

Weiskrantz, L.,Warrington, E. K., Sanders, M. D., & Marshall, J. (1974). Visual capacity in the hemianopic field following a restricted occipital ablation. Brain, 97, 709-728.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 The New School Psychology Bulletin

© The New School Psychology Bulletin | editors@nspb.net