Additive latency effects of selective and nonselective restricted priming types.
The purpose of this investigation was to examine further the contention of Alain et al. (1988) that a third priming type exists, called nonselective restricted (NSR) and controlled by response probability, which is distinct from those types influenced by foreperiod duration (nonselective general priming) and prediction probability (selective priming). In a four-choice reaction time (RT) task, prediction probability (.5, .7, & .9, indicating the likelihood of a particular response) and response probability (.5, .9, denoting the likelihood that a response would be needed at all) exerted significant but noninteractive effects on RTs for prepared responses (most probable), suggesting that each of these probabilities influence different priming types (Sternberg, 1969; selective and NSR, respectively). This was further indicated by the fact that prediction probability, but not response probability, significantly altered RTs for the unprepared (lesser probable) responses. Finally, the hypothesized nonselective character of NSR priming (i.e., all outputs controlled by response probability are equally affected by its value changes) was supported when responses were equiprobable, and, while the null effect of response probability just mentioned seemingly argued against this property when selective priming took place, the interpretation provided herein negated this opposition.
Buckolz
E
E
Faculty of Physical Education, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Alain
C
C
Sarrazin
C
C
D000328:Adult; D001143:Arousal; D001288:Attention; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011597:Psychomotor Performance; D011930:Reaction Time