HI Beth: I remember reading about studies where being exposed to stimuli preconsciously or subliminally results in a familiarity similar to the mere exposure effect.
I cannot find a precise reference right now but here is a piece from Wikipedia that might put you in the ballpark: In 1991, Baldwin and others in two studies questioned whether priming individuals with images flashed for an instant may affect experiences of self. In the first study flashed images of the scowling face of their faculty adviser or an approving face of another before graduate students evaluated their own research ideas. In the second study, participants who were Catholic were asked to evaluate themselves after being flashed a disapproving face of the Pope or another unfamiliar face. In both studies the self-ratings were lower after the presentation of a disapproving face with personal significance, however in the second study there was no effect if the disapproving face were unfamiliar.[5] In 1992, Krosnick and others in two studies with 162 undergraduates demonstrated that attitudes can develop without being aware of its antecedents. Individuals viewed nine slides of people performing familiar daily activities after being exposed to either an emotionally positive scene, such as a romantic couple or kittens, or an emotionally negative scene, such as a werewolf or a dead body between each slide. After exposure from which the individuals consciously perceived as a flash of light, the participants gave more positive personality traits to those people whose slides were associated with a emotionally positive scene and vice-versa. Despite the statistical difference, the subliminal messages had less of an impact on judgment than the slide's inherent level of physical attractiveness.[6] In order to determine whether these images affect an individual's evaluation of novel stimuli, unfamiliar Chinese characters, a study was conducted in 1993 which produced in similar results.[7] In 1998, Bar and Biederman questioned whether an image flashed briefly would prime an individual's response. An image was flashed for 47 milliseconds and then a mask would interrupt the processing. Following the first presentation only one in seven individuals could identify the image, while after the second presentation fifteen and twenty minutes later one in three could identify the image.[8] In 2004, in two studies 13 white individuals were exposed to either white or black faces, flashed either subliminally for 30 milliseconds or supraliminally for over half a second. Individuals showed greater fusiform gyrus and amygdala response to black faces than white, suggesting that the great amount of facial processing may be associated with a greater emotional response.[9] In a 2005 study, individuals were exposed to subliminal image flashed 16.7 milliseconds that could signal a potential threat and again with a supraliminal image flashed for half a second. Individuals showed greater amygdala activity, although right amygdala showed greater response to subliminal fear and the left amygdala showed greater response to supraliminal fear. Furthermore supraliminal fear showed more sustained cortical activity, suggesting that subliminal fear may not entail conscious surveillance while supraliminal fear entails higher-order processing.[10] In 2007, it was shown that subliminal exposure to the Israeli flag had a moderating effect on the political opinions and voting behaviors of Israeli volunteers. This effect was not present when a jumbled picture of the flag was subliminally shown.[11] 5^ Lopez, D. F. (1990). "Priming relationship schemas: My advisor and the pope are watching me from the back of my mind". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 26: 435. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(90)90068-W. 6^ a b Krosnick, J. A.; Betz, A. L.; Jussim, L. J.; Lynn, A. R. (1992). "Subliminal Conditioning of Attitudes". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 18: 152. doi:10.1177/0146167292182006. 7^ Murphy; Zajonc, RB (1993). "Affect, cognition, and awareness: affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures". Journal of personality and social psychology 64 (5): 723–39. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.723. PMID 8505704. 8^ a b Bar, M.; Biederman, I. (1998). "Sublimal Visual Priming". Psychological Science 9: 464–469. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00086. 9^ Cunningham, W. A.; Nezlek, J. B.; Banaji, M. R. (2004). "Implicit and Explicit Ethnocentrism: Revisiting the Ideologies of Prejudice" (Free full text). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30: 1332. doi:10.1177/0146167204264654. http://faculty.psy.ohio-state.edu/cunningham/pdf/cunningham.pspb.2004.pdf. Lay summary – Bradt, Steve (2004-12-09). 10^ Williams, L. M.; Liddell, B. J.; Kemp, A. H.; Bryant, R. A.; Meares, R. A.; Peduto, A. S.; Gordon, E. (2006). "Amygdala–prefrontal dissociation of subliminal and supraliminal fear". Human Brain Mapping 27 (8): 652–661. doi:10.1002/hbm.20208. PMID 16281289. 11^ Hassin, R. R.; Ferguson, M. J.; Shidlovski, D.; Gross, T. (2007). "Subliminal exposure to national flags affects political thought and behavior". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 19757. doi:10.1073/pnas.0704679104. See also: http://www.csicop.org/si/show/subliminal_perception_facts_and_fallacies/ but also: http://www.csicop.org/si/show/cargo-cult_science_of_subliminal_persuasion Finally: You might take a look at some priming studies. I think that all of this taken together might explain the study results in the link you provided. Annette ps: Ah, Tips :) Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [email protected] ---- Original message ---- >Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:55:42 -0500 >From: Beth Benoit <[email protected]> >Subject: [tips] subliminal advertising >To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" ><[email protected]> > > > > Glad to have TIPS back!! Thanks, Bill! > One of my students posted the following, and I am > trying to track down the validity of this. So far > I am unconvinced that there is any such thing as > subliminal advertising, but I remain a skeptic in > all things. > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/6232801/Subliminal-advertising-really-does-work-claim-scientists.html > > Researchers from the University College London found > that subliminal advertising actually works. Images > flashed before us at speeds of up to a fiftieth of a > second can still be processed and affect our > perception. What I found to be most interesting > about this article is that research showed that we > are most attune to negative images. Researchers > suggest this may be an evolutionary response to > danger. “Clearly, there are evolutionary > advantages to responding rapidly to emotional > information,” said Professor Nilli Lavie, who led > the research. “We can’t wait for our > consciousness to kick in if we see someone running > towards us with a knife or if we drive under rainy > or foggy weather conditions and see a sign warning > ‘danger’.” > Beth Benoit > Granite State College > Plymouth State University > New Hampshire > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: > [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe click here: > > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13534.4204dc3a11678c6b1d0be57cfe0a21b0&n=T&l=tips&o=56 > > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL > if the line is broken) > > or send a blank email to > leave-56-13534.4204dc3a11678c6b1d0be57cfe0a2...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=72 or send a blank email to leave-72-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
