99
Views
26
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Oscillations in Motor Priming: Positive Rebound Follows the Inhibitory Phase in the Masked Prime Paradigm

&
Pages 484-490 | Published online: 07 Aug 2010

References

  • Cisek, P., & Kalaska, J. F. (2005). Neural correlates of reaching decisions in dorsal premotor cortex: Specification of multiple direction choices and final selection of action. Neuron, 45, 801-814.
  • Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1737-1747.
  • Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, F. (2003). Response facilitation and inhibition in subliminal priming. Biological Psychology, 64, 7-26.
  • Jaskowski, P. (2007). The effect of nonmasking distractors on the priming of motor responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 456-468.
  • Jaskowski, P., & Przekoracka-Krawczyk, A. (2005). On the role of mask structure in subliminal priming. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 65, 409-417.
  • Klapp, S. T. (2005). Two versions of the negative compatibility effect: Comment on Lleras and Enns (2004). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 431-435.
  • Klapp, S. T., & Hinkley, L. B. (2002). The negative compatibility effect: Unconscious inhibition influences reaction time and response selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 255-269.
  • Neumann, O., & Klotz, W. (1994). Motor-responses to nonreportable, masked stimuli: Where is the limit of direct parameter specification? In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance: XV. Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 123-150). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Praamstra, P., & Seiss, E. (2005). The neurophysiology of response competition: Motor cortex activation and inhibition following subliminal response priming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 483-493.
  • Schlaghecken, F., Bowman, H., & Eimer, M. (2006). Dissociating local and global levels of perceptuo-motor control in masked priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 618-632.
  • Schlaghecken, F., & Maylor, E. A. (2005). Motor control in old age: Evidence of impaired low-level inhibition. Journals of Gerontology, Series B. Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60, P158-P161.
  • Seiss, E., & Praamstra, P. (2004). The basal ganglia and inhibitory mechanisms in response selection: Evidence from subliminal priming of motor responses in Parkinson's disease. Brain, 127, 330-339.
  • Sumner, P. (2007). Negative and positive masked-priming: Implications for motor inhibition. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 3, 317-326.
  • Sumner, P. (2008). Mask-induced priming and the negative compatibility effect. Experimental Psychology, 55, 133-141.
  • Sumner, P., Nachev, P., Morris, P., Jackson, S. R., Kennard, C., & Husain, M. (2007). Human medial frontal cortex mediates unconscious inhibition of voluntary action. Neuron, 54, 697-711.
  • Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2004). Action priming by briefly presented objects. Acta Psychologica, 116, 185-203.
  • Verleger, R., Jaskowski, P., Aydemir, A., van der Lubbe, R. H., & Groen, M. (2004). Qualitative differences between conscious and nonconscious processing? On inverse priming induced by masked arrows. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 494-515.
  • Leuthold, H., & Kopp, B. (1998). Mechanisms of priming by masked stimuli: Inferences from event-related brain potentials. Psychological Science, 9, 263-269.
  • Lingnau, A., & Vorberg, D. (2005). The time course of response inhibition in masked priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 545-557.
  • Lleras, A., & Enns, J. T. (2004). Negative compatibility or object updating? A cautionary tale of mask-dependent priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 475-493.
  • Lleras, A., & Enns, J. T. (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, 495-500.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.