Guessing right: Preconscious processing in inattentional blindness

Unconscious integration: Current evidence for integrative processing under subliminal conditions

Integrative processing is traditionally believed to be dependent on consciousness. While earlier studies within the last decade reported many types of integration under subliminal conditions (i.e. without perceptual awareness), these findings are widely challenged recently. This review evaluates the current evidence for 10 types of subliminal integration that are widely studied: arithmetic processing, object-context integration, multi-word processing, same-different processing, multisensory integration and 5 different types of associative learning. Potential methodological issues concerning awareness measures are also taken into account. It is concluded that while there is currently no reliable evidence for subliminal integration, this does not necessarily refute 'unconscious' integration defined through non-subliminal (e.g. implicit) approaches.

Publication bias casts doubt on implicit processing in inattentional blindness

Two recent meta-analyses on inattentional blindness (Kreitz, Pugnaghi, & Memmert, 2020; Nobre et al., 2020) concluded that objects can be processed implicitly even when attention is directed elsewhere. However, signs of publication bias are evident in both of these meta-analyses. Here, we employed multiple tools to correct for publication bias in the data aggregated in those meta-analyses. Analyses using the Precision-Effect Test (PET) and robust Bayesian meta-analysis (RoBMA) suggest that the estimates in the original meta-analyses were inflated, together with strong evidence of publication bias. Indeed, the data are consistent with no overall implicit effects. We suggest that more evidence, particularly from well-powered pre-registered experiments, is needed before solid conclusions can be drawn regarding implicit processing during inattentional blindness.

Implicit processing during inattentional blindness: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The occurrence of implicit processing of visual stimuli during inattentional blindness is still a matter of debate. To assess the evidence available in this debate, we conducted a systematic review of articles that explored whether unexpected visual stimuli presented during inattentional blindness are implicitly processed despite not being reported. Additionally, we employed meta-analysis to combine 59 behavioral experiments and investigate the statistical support for such implicit processing across experiments. Results showed that visual stimuli can be processed when unattended and unnoticed. Additionally, we reviewed the measures used to assess participants' awareness of the unexpected stimuli. We also employed meta-analysis to search for differences in awareness of the unexpected stimuli that may result from adopting distinct criteria to categorize participants as aware or unaware. The results showed that the overall effect of awareness changed depending on whether more demanding or less demanding measures of awareness were employed. This suggests that the choice of awareness measure may influence conclusions about whether processing of the US is implicit or explicit. We discuss the implications of these results for the study of implicit processing and the role of attention in visual cognition.