standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 4 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| claim_type | existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | nonconscious goal pursuit Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | behavioural-experiment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: behavioural-experiment | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The intention-behaviour correlations rest on small per-cell samples. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Retrospective self-report is a weak index of what participants were actually aware of during the task. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The intention questionnaire may not have been sensitive enough to detect real differences in cooperation motivation. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| controls | Experiment 3 used a DISSOCIATION PARADIGM specifically to test the perceptual-construal account Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: that the prime changed how the situation was PERCEIVED rather than activating a goal - the leading alternative explanation for behavioural priming · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| controls | a control group was subliminally exposed to words UNRELATED to impression formation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: that the effect comes from subliminal exposure as such rather than from the content of the primed words · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| controls | extensive questioning during debriefing looked for any sign that participants were aware of the priming manipulation's effect Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: that the effect is conscious compliance rather than nonconscious activation · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | goal pursuit Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: goal pursuit | concepts[0] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | content-free features Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: content-free features | concepts[1] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | persistence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: persistence | concepts[2] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | resumption Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: resumption | concepts[3] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | perceptual construal Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: perceptual construal | concepts[4] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | goal-directed action tendencies Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: goal-directed action tendencies | concepts[5] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| senses | nonconscious goal pursuit - the claim in one sentence, and note how much is packed into it: goals can be ACTIVATED OUTSIDE OF AWARENESS, then OPERATE nonconsciously, and do so EFFECTIVELY - guiding self-regulation rather than merely biasing a judgement. Three separate assertions (activation without awareness, autonomous operation, functional success), any of which could fail while the others held Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | goal versus construct - THE DISAMBIGUATION THIS CORPUS NEEDS AND RARELY GETS. A prime made of `win, compete, succeed, strive` could have activated a construct that changes how the situation is CONSTRUED, or a goal that DRIVES behaviour. The paper separates them by time course and states the falsifier first: NO model of construal effects predicts an increase over time, so the same prime is required to produce a decreasing perceptual effect and an increasing behavioural one. A crossover, not a difference in size Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | DEFINITION BY DIAGNOSTIC SIGNATURE - goal pursuit is identified by CONTENT-FREE features (vigour, persistence against obstacles, resumption after disruption) taken from the study of consciously held goals. Because the criteria are content-free they can be applied to a goal the participant cannot report, which is the only reason the nonconscious version is testable at all. The definition is doing methodological work, not just fixing a meaning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | the control is built into the definition: participants are given ONE AND THE SAME TASK with the goal activated for some and not others, so that `we were able to hold the content of the task goal constant across all participants` and let the content-free features be the only thing that varies. Borrowing a content-free definition and then holding content constant is the same decision made twice, at the level of theory and of design Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | replicates → Ovsiankina (1928) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → J. A. Bargh, 1990 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Atkinson and Birch (1970) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | goal pursuit —operationalised-as→ content-free features Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: The definitional move the whole paper rests on. Confidence 0.95: the sentence is a characterisation of goal pursuit, cited to Lewin, Heckhausen and Wicklund & Gollwitzer, not an inference of mine.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but goal pursuit is 'CHARACTERIZED BY' content-free features; operationalised-as is loose. also in: goal pursuit · content-free features | concept_edges[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | persistence —part-of→ content-free features Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: Listed as one of the three, in the sentence that names the category. also in: persistence · content-free features | concept_edges[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | resumption —part-of→ content-free features Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: The second of the three tested directly - Experiment 5, resumption after a lengthy disruption with a more attractive alternative available. also in: resumption · content-free features | concept_edges[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | goal-directed action tendencies —distinct-from→ perceptual construal Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: WHAT DELAY DOES TO THEM - construal effects DECREASE over time, goal-directed action tendencies INCREASE. A crossover on the same manipulation, and the increase is the half no accessibility or construal model predicts, which is what makes it a falsifier rather than a comparison · strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: THE SHARPEST ROW ON THIS RECORD. Two kinds of priming effect told apart by their TIME COURSE - the second record tonight where identity turns on latency rather than on magnitude (see Chen2018). The prediction is stated before the experiment and names the result that would refute it. | concept_edges[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANOVA | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | p-value Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: p-value | content_tags.statistics[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | interaction effect Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: interaction effect | content_tags.statistics[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | t-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: t-test | content_tags.statistics[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Cronbach's alpha Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Cronbach's alpha | content_tags.statistics[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | correlation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: correlation | content_tags.statistics[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | standardization (z scores) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: standardization (z scores) | content_tags.statistics[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mean | content_tags.statistics[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Participants primed with high-performance words found more words on unrelated word-search puzzles than participants primed with neutral words. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Priming the goal of cooperation increased the number of fish returned to the common pool, as did an explicit conscious cooperation goal. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The goal-priming effect did not depend on a concurrent conscious goal in the same direction, ruling out the 'piggybacking' account. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | A five-minute delay after the identical prime weakened the impression-formation (perceptual) effect but strengthened the task-performance (motivational) effect, a crossover dissociation. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Performance-goal primed participants were far more likely than neutral-primed participants to keep working after an explicit instruction to stop, showing persistence against an obstacle. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | After an interruption, a far larger share of performance-goal primed participants (66% against 32%) chose to resume the interrupted Scrabble task. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The self-reported intentions of participants with a nonconscious cooperation goal were unrelated to their actual cooperation, although priming did change their behaviour. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | automatic goal pursuit Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: automatic goal pursuit | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | content-free features Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: content-free features | content_tags.definitions[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | continuing on the task Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: continuing on the task | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | priming condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: priming condition | content_tags.variables[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | number of words Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: number of words | content_tags.variables[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | postpriming delay Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: postpriming delay | content_tags.variables[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | participant gender Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: participant gender | content_tags.variables[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | choice of task Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: choice of task | content_tags.variables[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | conscious goal Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: conscious goal | content_tags.variables[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | number of fish returned Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: number of fish returned | content_tags.variables[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 26.0 vs. 21.5 — mean number of hidden words found by performance-primed versus neutral-primed participants in Experiment 1 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 57% / 22% — proportion of participants who kept working after the stop signal, performance-primed versus neutral-primed (Experiment 4) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 66% / 32% — proportion who resumed the interrupted Scrabble task rather than switching to the cartoon task, primed versus unprimed (Experiment 5) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | F (1, 74) = 9.64, p = .003 — the reliable main effect of the performance prime on number of words found in Experiment 1 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 78 — number of participants in Experiment 1 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 288 — number of participants in the four-factor dissociation study, Experiment 3 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | r = −.11 — the (small, negative) correlation between self-reported intention to cooperate and actual cooperation among participants without a conscious cooperation goal Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[6] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.