title: How much like a target can a mask be? Geometric, spatial, and temporal similarity in priming: a reply to Schlaghecken and Eimer (2006).
abstract: The authors make 3 points in response to F. Schlaghecken and M. Eimer's proposal of self-inhibition as an explanatory factor in the negative compatibility effect: (a) The self-inhibition hypothesis lacks empirical support for its main tenets; (b) considering the roles of geometric, spatial, and temporal similarity of primes and masks makes self-inhibition unnecessary; and (c) the negative compatibility effect occurs even when the main tenets of self-inhibition are violated. The authors propose that understanding what is "relevant" in a masked-priming task applies not only to geometric features that are shared with the target but to spatial and temporal ones as well. Briefly, target-mask similarity determines how motor preparation is accumulated during the prime-mask sequence.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology.
authors.forename: Alejandro
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Lleras
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology.
authors.forename: James T
authors.identifier: 0000-0002-3676-8316
authors.initials: JT
authors.lastname: Enns
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001288:Attention; D003463:Cues; D004193:Discrimination Learning; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007266:Inhibition, Psychological; D008297:Male; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D010470:Perceptual Masking; D011597:Psychomotor Performance; D011601:Psychophysics; D011930:Reaction Time