Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38895041›Full record

ArticleOpen mind : discoveries in cognitive science2024

Unconscious Perception of Vernier Offsets.

Pietro Amerio, Matthias Michel, Stephan Goerttler, Megan A K Peters, Axel Cleeremans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Pietro AmerioConsciousness, Cognition & Computation Group, Center for Research in Cognition & Neurosciences, ULB Neuroscience Institute, Université libre de Bruxelles.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-6624-0137
Matthias MichelConsciousness, Cognition & Computation Group, Center for Research in Cognition & Neurosciences, ULB Neuroscience Institute, Université libre de Bruxelles.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5780-5702
Stephan GoerttlerConsciousness, Cognition & Computation Group, Center for Research in Cognition & Neurosciences, ULB Neuroscience Institute, Université libre de Bruxelles.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6534-9735
Megan A K PetersDepartment of Cognitive Sciences, University of California Irvine.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0248-0816
Axel CleeremansConsciousness, Cognition & Computation Group, Center for Research in Cognition & Neurosciences, ULB Neuroscience Institute, Université libre de Bruxelles.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9757-5235

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The comparison between conscious and unconscious perception is a cornerstone of consciousness science. However, most studies reporting above-chance discrimination of unseen stimuli do not control for criterion biases when assessing awareness. We tested whether observers can discriminate subjectively invisible offsets of Vernier stimuli when visibility is probed using a bias-free task. To reduce visibility, stimuli were either backward masked or presented for very brief durations (1-3 milliseconds) using a modern-day Tachistoscope. We found some behavioral indicators of perception without awareness, and yet, no conclusive evidence thereof. To seek more decisive proof, we simulated a series of Bayesian observer models, including some that produce visibility judgements alongside type-1 judgements. Our data are best accounted for by observers with slightly suboptimal conscious access to sensory evidence. Overall, the stimuli and visibility manipulations employed here induced mild instances of blindsight-like behavior, making them attractive candidates for future investigation of this phenomenon.

Indexed as

bias-free taskconsciousnessobserver modeltachistoscopeunconscious perception

Identifiers

PMID38895041
PMCPMC11185422

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.