Between Dec 19, 2024 and Jan 2, 2025, datasets can be submitted to DRUM but will not be processed until after the break. Staff will not be available to answer email during this period, and will not be able to provide DOIs until after Jan 2. If you are in need of a DOI during this period, consider Dryad or OpenICPSR. Submission responses to the UDC may also be delayed during this time.

Browsing by Subject "Antipriming"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Is metamemory implicit? evidence of priming and antipriming in individuals with and without traumatic brain injury.
    (2009-07) Ramanathan, Pradeep
    Implicit memory refers to the phenomenon of prior exposure to a stimulus influencing cognitive processing on subsequent exposure to that stimulus, irrespective of one's awareness of such influence. Metamemory refers to the presumably explicit act of making judgments about one's memory. Theories vary regarding possible relationships between implicit memory and metamemory, with mixed findings of previous research. Some researchers argue that there is no relationship, that metamemory does not rely on input from implicit memory only on explicit memory (Hart, 1965; Koriat, 1995), while others argue that metamemory is driven only by implicit processes (Reder & Schunn, 1996). Still others argue that the metamemory system relies on input from both implicit and explicit memory (Vernon & Usher, 2003). To date, no study has examined whether subliminal masked priming and antipriming can influence individuals' metamemory judgments of learning (JOLs). The present study independently varies subliminal masked priming conditions (using baseline, prime, and antiprime conditions) and observes the influence on participants' immediate and delayed JOLs and relative predictive accuracy, in a paired associate learning task. This study also examines long term repetition priming and antipriming (measured in a visual object identification task) to determine whether the magnitudes of these effects correlate with those found in the paired associate learning task. Both neurologically normal individuals and those with traumatic brain injury (TBI) participated in this study. Metamemory deficits are common after TBI. Thus, inclusion of this clinical population in the present study is critical in evaluating whether or not such individuals' metamemory judgments can be influenced by, or correlated with, priming or antipriming. Furthermore, to date, no study has examined antipriming among TBI survivors; therefore their participation in the visual object identification task will shed light on antipriming in that population, and will provide a perceptual implicit memory benchmark against which to compare any findings of implicit metamemory. Results demonstrate no main effect of subliminal masked priming and antipriming on participants' metamemory judgments for JOL ratings, predictive accuracy (gamma correlation), or response times for judgments of the likelihood of future recall of target words. However, there was a trend towards an interaction effect of priming and JOL timing (i.e.: immediate vs. delayed), such that JOLs made immediately after study were higher for the primed items than for the baseline or antiprimed items. In contrast, antipriming did significantly influence explicit recall, with slowing of explicit recall response times for antiprimed target words, relative to word-pairs in the baseline condition. Difference scores between JOL ratings and recall accuracy reflected overconfidence among TBI survivors, and good calibration among controls. There was a significant decrease in the overconfidence of TBI survivors for antiprimed items. However, much of this lowering was caused by an increase in recall accuracy for antiprime items. In the visual object identification task, antipriming was robustly observed for both participant groups; there was significant slowing observed for responses to antiprimed items. Finally, a mild positive correlation between the degree of priming for visual object identification and the degree of priming of relative predictive accuracy in the paired associate learning task was found across participants. The present research finds weak evidence for the role of implicit memory, in the form of masked priming and antipriming, in JOLs and relative predictive accuracy in paired associate learning. Future research providing masked priming stimuli immediately prior to the solicitation of JOLs may address possible attenuation of such effects which may have occurred in the present study. Additionally, using numbers from the JOL rating scale as subliminal stimuli may shed additional light on the type of representation taken as input by the metamemory system. Finally, exploration of long term priming and antipriming of metamemory in the TBI population should be undertaken to determine whether or not there is a priming benefit to metamemory judgments through supraliminal implicit memory.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Masked antipriming: a behavioral and event-related potential examination of short-term antipriming effects
    (2008-11) Deason, Rebecca Gwynne
    Antipriming is a new implicit-memory effect of prior processing of stimuli measured as impaired identification of objects following recent encoding of other objects (e.g.,identifying a piano is impaired by having recently viewed objects that are not pianos; Marsolek et al., 2006). Antipriming effects have been established in several behavioral experiments (with young adults, amnesic patients, and age-matched controls),neurocomputational models, and studies measuring neural activity. In this series of studies, I extended the prior findings by establishing a new masked antipriming paradigm. This new paradigm allowed examination of the antipriming effect in a task where the prime and target are only separated by milliseconds (a short-term memory task) as opposed to the minutes of separation between prime and target in the original task (measuring long-term memory). Experiment 1 demonstrated both repetition priming (faster response times for repetition primed objects compared to objects in a baseline condition) and antipriming (decreased accuracy as compared to baseline identification). In Experiment 2, speed was emphasized in an effort to detect both priming and antipriming in one measure. Experiment 3 was the first experiment to directly examine the role of visual similarity in antipriming and it demonstrated that high visual similarity between objects could result in increased antipriming. An ERP masked antipriming task revealed two main effects. There were no very early effects and the first effect occurred around 500-600 ms as a positive deflection for antiprimed objects compared to baseline and repetition primed items. The second effect began around 1100 ms also as a positive deflection for antiprimed objects compared to baseline (and sometimes repetition primed items). This effect extends out through 1600 ms and has both a posterior and a frontal location. These effects could be explained by the same theory applied to the long-term memory effects, or they could be due to more immediate effects of competition between object representations.