The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry.

Psychology

Text available via DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01471.x
Final published version

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry. / Walker, Peter.
In: British Journal of Psychology, Vol. 66, No. 3, 08.1975, p. 347-356.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Walker, P 1975, 'The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry.', British Journal of Psychology, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01471.x

APA

Walker, P. (1975). The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry. British Journal of Psychology, 66(3), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01471.x

Vancouver

Walker P. The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry. British Journal of Psychology. 1975 Aug;66(3):347-356. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01471.x

Author

Walker, Peter. / The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry. In: British Journal of Psychology. 1975 ; Vol. 66, No. 3. pp. 347-356.

Bibtex

@article{63992624acbf40e186358184cc6f8965,

title = "The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry.",

abstract = "An analogy is drawn between the perceptual limitation that characterizes the dichotic listening paradigm and the {\textquoteleft}suppression{\textquoteright} that occurs in binocular rivalry when different stimuli are presented to the two eyes. An experiment is reported which focuses on the fate of the information residing in a suppressed eye (unattended channel) during binocular rivalry. It is demonstrated that the temporal course of rivalry is sensitive to the presence of a subliminal moving stimulus within the currently suppressed field. The effects are seen to confirm a literal interpretation of Levelt's (1966) thesis which relates changes in the {\textquoteleft}stimulus strength{\textquoteright} of a rivalling field to subsequent changes in the temporal course of the phenomenon. This interpretation is consistent with the hypothesis that, despite phenomenal suppression, a full analysis is undertaken on the currently non-dominant stimulus. The data are related to models of selective attention, and to the notion that there are parallel visual systems.",

author = "Peter Walker",

year = "1975",

month = aug,

doi = "10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01471.x",

language = "English",

volume = "66",

pages = "347--356",

journal = "British Journal of Psychology",

issn = "0007-1269",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The subliminal perception of movement and the 'suppression' in binocular rivalry.

AU - Walker, Peter

PY - 1975/8

Y1 - 1975/8

N2 - An analogy is drawn between the perceptual limitation that characterizes the dichotic listening paradigm and the ‘suppression’ that occurs in binocular rivalry when different stimuli are presented to the two eyes. An experiment is reported which focuses on the fate of the information residing in a suppressed eye (unattended channel) during binocular rivalry. It is demonstrated that the temporal course of rivalry is sensitive to the presence of a subliminal moving stimulus within the currently suppressed field. The effects are seen to confirm a literal interpretation of Levelt's (1966) thesis which relates changes in the ‘stimulus strength’ of a rivalling field to subsequent changes in the temporal course of the phenomenon. This interpretation is consistent with the hypothesis that, despite phenomenal suppression, a full analysis is undertaken on the currently non-dominant stimulus. The data are related to models of selective attention, and to the notion that there are parallel visual systems.

AB - An analogy is drawn between the perceptual limitation that characterizes the dichotic listening paradigm and the ‘suppression’ that occurs in binocular rivalry when different stimuli are presented to the two eyes. An experiment is reported which focuses on the fate of the information residing in a suppressed eye (unattended channel) during binocular rivalry. It is demonstrated that the temporal course of rivalry is sensitive to the presence of a subliminal moving stimulus within the currently suppressed field. The effects are seen to confirm a literal interpretation of Levelt's (1966) thesis which relates changes in the ‘stimulus strength’ of a rivalling field to subsequent changes in the temporal course of the phenomenon. This interpretation is consistent with the hypothesis that, despite phenomenal suppression, a full analysis is undertaken on the currently non-dominant stimulus. The data are related to models of selective attention, and to the notion that there are parallel visual systems.

U2 - 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01471.x

DO - 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1975.tb01471.x

M3 - Journal article

VL - 66

SP - 347

EP - 356

JO - British Journal of Psychology

JF - British Journal of Psychology

SN - 0007-1269

IS - 3

ER -

Research

Links

Text available via DOI: