Processing of stimuli with hidden semantics by the cognitive unconscious

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The debate about the capabilities and limitations of the cognitive unconscious continues since the term first appeared in scientific discourse. Researchers pay special attention to the processes of reading and related semantic processing, since it is typically believed that they occur exclusively consciously. Cognitive psychology has accumulated impressive empirical material that questions the current state of affairs. Studies in the paradigms of artificial grammar learning, word superiority effect, subliminal priming provide sufficient grounds to assume the ability of the cognitive unconscious to process semantic material. In the present experimental study, the author clarify the forms of manifestation of the cognitive unconscious when processing text material, namely, words written from right to left (inversions) and meaningless letter combinations. The participants perform a mnemonic task to recognize previously presented stimuli in a series of fillers. It is supposed that stimuli with a hidden semantic component – inverted words – will have an advantage in the speed and frequency of recognition, compared to meaningless letter combinations, and fillers will be recognized more slowly and less often than previously presented relevant stimuli. The desired effects were not detected, but a classic result for cognitive psychology is observed – correct answers are given faster than erroneous ones, and correct recognition of inverted stimuli occurs faster than all, which, albeit indirectly, indicates unconscious semantic processing. There are reasons to believe that the hypothesis could not be experimentally confirmed due to the use of the original research paradigm. The author plans a study using the classic subliminal priming paradigm to re-test the hypotheses put forward.

About the authors

Aleksandr Vitalievich Banshchikov

St. Petersburg State Institute of Psychology and Social Work; St. Petersburg State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: alex.bansh00@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3719-9693

assistant of Chair of General and Consulting Psychology, assistant of Chair of General Psychology

Russian Federation, 199178, St. Petersburg, 12-th line of Vasilievsky Island, 13, building А; 199034, St. Petersburg, Universitetskaya Naberezhnaya, 7–9

References

  1. Piazhe Zh. Inconscient affectif et inconsient cognitive. Voprosy psikhologii, 1996, no. 6, pp. 125–131.
  2. Rozin P. The evolution of intelligence and access to the cognitive unconscious. Progress in psychobiology and physiological psychology. San Diego, Academic Press Publ., 1976. Vol. 6, pp. 245–280.
  3. Kihlstrom J.F. The Cognitive Unconscious. Science, 1987, vol. 237, no. 4821, pp. 1445–1452. doi: 10.1126/science.3629249.
  4. Klapp S.T., Hinkley L.B. The Negative Compatibility Effect: Unconscious Inhibition Influences Reaction Time and Response Selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2002, vol. 131, no. 2, pp. 255–269. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.131.2.255.
  5. Meyen S., Zerweck I.A., Amado C., von Luxburg U., Franz V.H. Advancing research on unconscious priming: When can scientists claim an indirect task advantage? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2022, vol. 151, no. 1, pp. 65–81. doi: 10.1037/xge0001065.
  6. Bargh J.A., Ferguson M.J. Beyond Behaviorism: On the Automaticity of Higher Mental Processes. Psychological Bulletin, 2000, vol. 126, no. 6, pp. 925–945. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.126.6.925.
  7. Bargh J.A., Williams E.L. The Automaticity of Social Life. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2006, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–4. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2006.00395.x.
  8. Bargh J.A. The cognitive unconscious in everyday life. The cognitive unconscious: The first half century. Oxford, Oxford University Press Publ., 2022, pp. 89–114. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780197501573.003.0005.
  9. Reber A.S. Implicit learning of artificial grammars. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 1967, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 855–863. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(67)80149-X.
  10. Reber A.S. Implicit learning: Background, history, theory. The cognitive unconscious: The first half century. Oxford, Oxford University Press Publ., 2022, pp. 3–21. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780197501573.003.0001.
  11. Schiff R., Katan P. Does complexity matter? Meta-analysis of learner performance in artificial grammar tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 2014, vol. 5, pp. 1–10. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01084.
  12. Cattell J.M. The time it takes to see and name objects. Mind, 1886, vol. 11, no. 41, pp. 63–65. doi: 10.1093/mind/os-xi.41.63.
  13. Dean S. Pryamo seychas vash mozg sovershaet podvig: kak chelovek nauchilsya chitat i prevrashchat slova na bumage v miry i smysly [Your brain is performing a feat right now: how humans learned to read and transform words on paper into worlds and meanings]. Moscow, Bombora Publ., 2022. 398 p.
  14. Falikman M.V. Paradoksy zritelnogo vnimaniya: effekty pertseptivnykh zadach [Paradoxes of Visual Attention: Effects of Perceptual Tasks]. Moscow, Izdatelskiy Dom YaSK: Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury Publ., 2018. 263 p.
  15. Marcel A.J. Conscious and unconscious perception: an approach to relation between phenomenal experience and perceptual processes. Cognitive Psychology, 1983, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 238–300. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(83)90010-5.
  16. Marcel A.J. Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking and word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 1983, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 197–237. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(83)90009-9.
  17. Van den Bussche E., Van den Noortgate W., Reynvoet B. Mechanisms of masked priming: a meta-analysis. Psychological bulletin, 2009, vol. 135, no. 3, pp. 452–477. doi: 10.1037/a0015329.
  18. Janiszewski C., Wyer R.S. Content and process priming: A review. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2014, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 96–118. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.05.006.
  19. Chien Sung-En, Chang Wei-Chen, Chen Yi-Chuan, Huang Shu-Lih, Yeh Su-Ling. The limits of unconscious semantic priming. Current Psychology, 2023, vol. 42, pp. 26824–26835. doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-03590-1.
  20. Zher-Wen, Rongjun Yu. Unconscious integration: Current evidence for integrative processing under subliminal conditions. British Journal of Psychology, 2023, vol. 114, no. 2, pp. 430–456. doi: 10.1111/bjop.12631.
  21. Hernández-Gutiérrez D., Sorrel M.A., Shanks D.R., Vadillo M.A. The Conscious Side of ‘Subliminal’ Linguistic Priming: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Reliability Analysis of Visibility Measures. Journal of Cognition, 2025, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–20. doi: 10.5334/joc.419.
  22. Asso D., Wyke M. Experimental study of the effect of letter reversals on reading. British Journal of Psychology, 1967, vol. 58, no. 3-4, pp. 413–419. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1967.tb01098.x.
  23. Allakhverdov V.M. Opyt teoreticheskoy psikhologii [Experience of theoretical psychology]. Sankt Petersburg, Pechatnyy dvor Publ., 1993. 325 p.
  24. Allakhverdov V.M. Soznanie kak paradoks. Eksperimentalnaya psikhologika [Consciousness as a paradox. Experimental psychologics]. Sankt Petersburg, DNK Publ., 2000. Vol. 1. 528 p. EDN: UDGMKX.
  25. Schielzeth H., Dingemanse N.J., Nakagawa S., Westneat D.F., Allegue H., Teplitsky C., Reale D., Dochtermann N.A., Garamszegi L.Z., Araya‐Ajoy Y.G. Robustness of linear mixed effects models to violations of distributional assumptions. Methods in ecology and evolution, 2020, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 1141–1152. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13434.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2025 Banshchikov A.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies