• Dewitt Cheek posted an update 1 year, 1 month ago

    Rget word or to categorize it as representing organic or artificial objects, can transform the processing route taken by an unconscious (masked) word preceding the target word (Nakamura et al., 2007). Along equivalent lines, Kiefer and MartensFrontiers in Human Neurosciencewww.frontiersin.orgMay 2012 | Volume six | Post 121 |van Gaal et al.Consciousness, MedChemExpress GNE-7915 cognitive control and decision-making(2010) lately showed that the N400 ERP element to unrelated prime-target pairs (e.g., masked word “chair” followed by a visible fpsyg.2016.01448 target word “leaf “), compared to associated prime-target pairs (e.g., masked word “chair” followed by visible target word “table”), was enhanced when a semantic task-set was induced by a visible cue presented immediately prior to each trial and jir.2014.0001 was attenuated by a perceptual task-set (see also Martens et al., 2011). Further, attended subliminal stimuli possess a stronger influence on behavior than unattended subliminal stimuli, and this can be the case for spatial interest (Kentridge et al., 1999, 2004, 2008; Sumner et al., 2006; Bahrami et al., 2008a; Marzouki et al., 2008; Finkbeiner and Palermo, 2009), temporal focus (Naccache et al., 2002; Kiefer and Brendel, 2006; Fabre et al., 2007) and for the duration of attentional load (Bahrami et al., 2008b; Martens and Kiefer, 2009). Task-relevant (attended) stimuli are processed stronger than task-irrelevant (unattended) stimuli, even when unconscious. Ansorge and Neumann (2005) showed that task-relevant prime features (e.g., shape) impacted responses to the target only when the shape dimension was response relevant, but not when this feature was task-irrelevant, for example when the color in the target determined the essential response (see also Tapia et al., 2010). We recently explored the role of task-relevance of subliminal info making use of EEG inside a process in which subjects had to respond as quick as you possibly can to a black Go annulus, unless it was preceded by a briefly presented gray circle (the no-go stimulus). As a consequence of variations in the SOA in between the No-Go circle and Go annulus, on some trials the No-Go circle was perceived consciously, whereas on others it was not. Around the existing trial, unconscious No-Go circles activated prefrontal handle networks (van Gaal et al., 2008), along with the extent to which correlated strongly together with the level of RT slowing to these stimuli. Crucially, precisely the identical subliminal gray circle did not activate the PFC when it was task-irrelevant, but presented inside a extremely equivalent task-context (despite the fact that it yielded related early visual responses). This outcome highlights that the processing route taken by an unconscious stimulus strongly depends on task-relevance (and interest to the stimulus), and that task-irrelevant subliminal stimuli probably decay quickly when progressing up in the cortical hierarchy. Lately, it has been observed that, beneath some situations, cognitive control processes can nonetheless be influenced by subliminal stimuli presented outdoors the direct concentrate of spatial interest (Rahnev et al., 2012). The part of interest as well as other top-down components for unconscious details processing could rely on form of information to become processed. Current analysis suggests that attention might be a lot more important for “neutral” stimuli (e.g., numbers: Naccache et al., 2002) than for emotional, arousing or “evolutionary relevant” stimuli.