Priming and Antipriming of and Judgments of Learning Theresa Jingyun Yao, André Lindsey †, Pradeep Ramanathan California State University, East Bay and the †University of Connecticut

Introduction Experiment Procedure Results Conclusion

Purpose: Background: Experiment 1: Current Status: Preliminary Findings: To investigate the effects of implicit Ramanathan, Kennedy, and Marsolek • 96 participants completed study (48 in each • The widely reported finding in the literature of the so- memory on in healthy (2014) investigated whether priming experiment – 24 male, 24 female in each) called “Delayed JOL effect” was replicated, lending Study and immediate JOL phase • Missing cases were not replaced, reducing the young adults. and antipriming could affect JOLs in 18 credence to the integrity of the task protocol. TOOTH -- ? number of subjects in both experimental analyses • For experiment 1 (PreStudy) the finding of a possible individuals with Traumatic Brain Injury Please rate your confidence to 28 (15 males, 13 females). Immediate JOL: self-paced → and 18 matched controls. In that study, • Black Bars = trials for which immediate JOLs antipriming effect in the previous paper was not 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% replicated in this larger sample study. : were solicited in each trial a masked prime or • Red Bars = trials for which delayed JOLs were • For experiment 2 (PreJOL), preliminary results Implicit memory refers to changes in the antiprime word was presented solicited TOOTH - VALLEY suggest a possible effect of priming on confidence. speed or accuracy of processing a immediately prior to presentation of ← Study word pair: 5000ms (Control) Experiment 1 - Replication • The positive prime condition had significantly stimulus due to prior processing of that each word-pair for study. Participants 9000ms (TBI) Gamma by Priming and Timing Conditions 1.00 lower confidence scores than either baseline or valley (or a similar) stimulus, irrespective of studied the word-pair and made an 0.90 0.80 antiprime, and this is equally due to increased awareness of such changes (Schacter, 0.70 accuracy and decreased JOLs for that ← Subliminal prime: 50ms 0.60 immediate or delayed JOL. (See figure 0.50 condition. Chiu, & Ochsner, 1993). Gamma Kruskal 0.40 in the next panel). A recall test was &&&&&&& - 0.30

0.20 completed afterwards. ← Forward mask: 500ms 0.10 0.00 Priming: Goodman Further analyses: + Baseline Prime Antiprime Viewing an image or reading a word The results of that study showed that Immediate Delayed • Some 42% of participant data were not included due improves the accuracy and response ← Fixation point: 1500ms Experiment 1 - Replication to empty cells. The final analysis will replace antipriming significantly lowered Confidence by Priming and Timing Conditions time for subsequently processing the 10.00 missing cases. participants’ JOLs and overconfidence. 8.00 same or similar stimulus for some Thus, presenting masked stimuli 6.00 • Analysis did not include participant sex as a period of time thereafter. Participants stared at a fixation point for 4.00 covariate, as between group t-tests found no immediately prior to word-pair study 2.00 difference. If after replacing missing cases a sex 1500 ms, followed by a 500 ms forward 0.00 Confidence Baseline Prime Antiprime difference is found in t-tests, this will be included as seemed to affect JOLs. -2.00 Antipriming: masking row of ampersands. Then, a -4.00 a covariate lower case item was presented for 50 -6.00 Viewing an image or reading a word Here we replicate and extend these Immediate Delayed worsens the accuracy and response ms. This item could be either a row of In Experiment 1: findings by presenting the masked • Timing condition had a significant effect on both gamma and confidence scores Future directions: time for subsequently processing an x’s (baseline), the ensuing target word (Gamma: p < .001; Confidence: p < .025). This is the “Delayed JOL Effect” stimuli: • If these results remain after the above adjustments, • Priming condition was not significant (Gamma: p < .814 ; Confidence: p < .349) item that is different from the of the cue-target word-pair (prime), or a then the next step will be to investigate the causes word unrelated either to the ensuing for increased recall and decreased JOL in the previously processed item (Marsolek 1) Immediately before word-pair study, positive prime condition cue or target (antiprime). This stimulus Experiment 2 - Stimulus before JOL et al., 2010). to replicate the prior findings, and Gamma by Priming and Timing Conditions 1.00 item was immediately followed by the 0.90

Gamma 0.80 cue-target word-pair, in capital letters, 0.70 References Metamemory: 2) Immediately before making the JOL 0.60 • Marsolek, C.J., Deason, R.G., Ketz, N.A., Ramanathan, P.,

0.50 Kruskal for five seconds. After the initial training - to reduce the likelihood that the 0.40 Bernat, E.M., Steele, V.R., Patrick, C.J., Verfaellie, M., Self-monitoring and self-regulation of 0.30 Schnyer D.M. (2010). Identifying objects impairs knowledge block, there was one trial block of 60 0.20 one’s own memory processes. masked stimuli are priming or 0.10 of other objects: A relearning explanation for the neural word-pairs, presented in the above Goodman 0.00 repetition effect. NeuroImage, 49, 1919 – 1932. antipriming rather than JOL Baseline Prime Antiprime manner. For a randomized half of the Immediate Delayed • Ramanathan, P., Kennedy, M.R., Marsolek, C.J. (2014). Judgment of Learning (JOL): Implicit Memory Influences on Metamemory During Verbal trials, a JOL rating was made Experiment 2 - Stimulus before JOL Learning After Traumatic Brain Injury. Journal of Speech, We also use a larger sample size, with Confidence by Priming and Timing Conditions A type of metamemory measure: an Language, and Hearing Research, 57, 1817 – 1830. college students with no neurological immediately after studying the word- 15.00 estimate on how well an individual 10.00 • Schacter, D.L., Chiu, C-Y, & Ochsner, K.N. (1993). Implicit pair. For the remaining half of the items, memory: A selective review. Annual Reviews Neuroscience, believes he/she learned something, impairments. 5.00 the JOL was delayed for approximately 16,159-182. 0.00 often represented on a Likert scale. Baseline Prime Antiprime two minutes. Finally, a recall test was -5.00 Confidence Acknowledgements: Primary Research completed -10.00 • UConn student research assistants: Talia Cusanelli, Jenine Example: -15.00 Entwistle, Jillian Kowalski, Deborah Lanza, Allison Page, Evan Questions: Immediate Delayed = Significant Effect Shuris • CSU East Bay student research assistants: Shannon Perez, 1) Will masked priming or antipriming In Experiment 2: “How confident are you that in ten minutes Experiment 2: • Timing condition had a significant main effect on both gamma and confidence Daniella Galindo affect measures related to JOLs scores (Gamma: p < .001; Confidence: p < .025) • This research was funded by the University of Connecticut and you will be able to remember the second Followed the same procedure as above, • Priming condition was not significant for Gamma (p < .490), but was significant for the Center for Student Research at California State University, word that went with the first word, when Confidence (p < .014) East Bay. but with the masked stimuli presented • Collapsed across timing condition, the positive priming condition was you see it appear on the computer screen? 2) Will manipulating the point at which significantly lower than baseline (PR = -4.4% while BL = 5.5% for a immediately prior to the JOL request, difference/confidence score drop of approximately 10% in the prime condition as compared to baseline) we present implicit memory stimuli Correspondence about this research may be sent to: 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%” rather than immediately prior to word- • Further exploration of this indicates that there was both an increase in Recall for primed items over baseline (approximately 5%), and a decrease Theresa Jingyun Yao influence any such effects on pair study. in JOL (approximately 5%) for primed items vs. baseline. measures related to the JOLs? Email: [email protected]