Ansorge, U., Francis, G., Herzog, M., & ??men, H. (2007). Visual masking and the dynamics of human perception, cognition, and consciousness: A century of progress, a contemporary synthesis, and future directions. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3 (1), 1?8.
Bar, M. and Biederman, I.(1998).Subliminal visual priming. Psychological Science. 9, 464–469
Boy, F. and Sumner, P. (2010).Tight coupling between positive and reversed priming in the masked prime paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 36(4): 892-905.
Debner, J. A., & Jacoby, L. L. (1994).Unconscious perception: Attention, awareness, and control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20,304–317
Eimer, M. (1999). Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of masked prime stimuli on motor activation and behavioural performance. Acta Psychologica 101(2–3): 293–313.
Eimer, M. and F. Schlaghecken (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 24(6): 1737–1747.
Eimer, M. and F. Schlaghecken (2002). Links between conscious awareness and response inhibition: evidence from masked priming. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 9 (3): 514–520.
Eimer, M. and F. Schlaghecken (2003). Response facilitation and inhibition in subliminal priming. Biological psychology 64(1–2): 7–26.
Huber, D. E. (2008). Immediate Priming and Cognitive Aftereffects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 137(2): 324–347.
Huber, D. E. and O’Reilly, R. C. (2003).Persistence and accommodation in short-term priming and other perceptual paradigms: Temporal segregation through synaptic depression. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 27, 403–430.
Jaskowski, P. (2007). The effect of nonmasking distractors on the priming of motor responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 33(2): 456–468.
Jaskowski, P. (2008). The negative compatibility effect with nonmasking flankers: A case for mask-triggered inhibition hypothesis. Consciousness and Cognition 17(3): 765–777.
Jaskowski, P. and A. Przekoracka-Krawczyk. (2005). On the role of mask structure in subliminal priming. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis,65: 409–417.
Jaskowski, P. and M. Slosarek (2007). How important is a prime's gestalt for subliminal priming? Consciousness and Cognition. 16: 485–497.
Kiesel, A., M. P. Berner, et al. (2008). Negative congruency effects: A test of the inhibition account. Consciousness and Cognition 17(1): 1–21.
Klapp, S. T. (2005). Two Versions of the Negative Compatibility Effect: Comment on Lleras and Enns (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 134(3): 431–435.
Klapp, S. T. and L. B. Hinkley (2002). The negative compatibility effect: unconscious inhibition influences reaction time and response selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 131(2): 255–69.
Klauer, K. C. (2010). From sunshine to double arrows: An evaluation window account of negative compatibility effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 139(3): 490–519.
Lleras, A. and J. T. Enns (2004). Negative compatibility or object updating? A cautionary tale of mask-dependent priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology :General. 133(4): 475–93.
Lleras, A. and J. T. Enns (2005). Updating a cautionary tale of masked priming: Reply to Klapp (2005). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 134(3): 436–440.
Lleras, A. and J. T. Enns (2006). How much like a target can a mask be? Geometric, spatial, and temporal similarity in priming: A reply to Schlaghecken and Eimer (2006). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135(3): 495–500.
Moore, C. M. and A. Lleras (2005). On the role of object representations in substitution masking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception Performance 31(6): 1171–80.
Schlaghecken, F. and M. Eimer (2000). A central-peripheral asymmetry in masked priming. Perception Psychophysis 62(7): 1367–82.
Schlaghecken, F. and M. Eimer (2002). Motor activation with and without inhibition: evidence for a threshold mechanism in motor control. Perception Psychophysis 64(1): 148–62.
Schlaghecken, F. and M. Eimer (2006). Active masks and active inhibition: a comment on Lleras and Enns (2004) and on Verleger, Jaskowski, Aydemir, van der Lubbe, and Groen (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135(3): 484–94.
Schlaghecken, F., E. Blagrove, et al. (2007). Incidental learning of S-R contingencies in the masked prime task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 33(5): 1177–1188.
Schlaghecken, F., E. Blagrove, et al. (2008). No difference between conscious and nonconscious visuomotor control: evidence from perceptual learning in the masked prime task.. Consciousness and Cognition 17(1): 84–93.
Schlaghecken, Eimer, et al. (2006). Active masks and active inhibition: A comment on Lleras and Enns (2004) and on Verleger, Jaskowski, Aydemir, van der Lubbe, and Groen (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135(3): 484–494.
Schlaghecken, F., L. Rowley, et al. (2007). The negative compatibility effect:A case for self-inhibition. Advances in Cognitive Psychology. 3: 227–240.
Sumner, P. (2007). Negative and positive masked-priming: Implications for motor inhibition. Advances in Cognitive Psychology 3(1–2): 317–326.
Sumner, P. (2008). Mask-induced priming and the negative compatibility effect. Experimental Psychology 55(2): 133–141.
Verleger R., Jaskowski, P., et al. (2004). Qualitative differences between conscious and nonconscious processing? On inverse priming induced by masked arrows. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 133(4): 494–515. |