ReviewFrontiers in psychology2025
New methods, old questions: advancing the study of unconscious perception.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- When visibility and priming have an inverse relationship: A successful replication of Vorberg et al., 2003.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Updated Expectations are Needed for Masked Priming Experiments: Commentary on Tsikandilakis et al. (2025).Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2026Article
- From Subliminality, to the Unconscious Mind: Philosophical Lineages, Evolutionary Paradoxes, and the Future of the Origins of the Unconscious.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2026Article
- Trial-wise awareness ratings do not capture the dynamics of masked priming.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2026Article
- A Re-Exploration of our Unconscious: What We Have Come To Unmask; What Still Lies Beneath.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Since the early experimental studies of the late 19th century, research on unconscious perception has been shaped by persistent methodological challenges and evolving experimental approaches aimed at demonstrating perception without awareness. In this review, we will discuss some of the most relevant challenges researchers have faced in demonstrating unconscious perception, and examine how different measures of awareness (e.g., objective vs. subjective) yield different awareness thresholds-often leading to two alternative approaches to demonstrating unconscious perception. We will further explore new methodologies in the field, such as regression-based Bayesian modeling, sensitivity vs. awareness (SvA) curves derived from General Recognition Theory (GRT), the liminal-prime paradigm, and two-interval forced choice (2IFC) designs. Finally, we emphasize the need for brain-based approaches to unconscious perception and discussed some promising studies in this area, while also highlighting the role of individual differences and alternative frameworks such as predictive coding and active inference views in future research. Overall, the new approaches and methodologies discussed here will advance the field by addressing the challenges inherent in demonstrating cognition in the absence of awareness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.