(cid:NN). The PDF this text was extracted from encodes 10 characters in a way that names no letter, so the extractor could not say what they were. The quotes keep them because a quote is reproduced exactly or it proves nothing — the marks are the source’s, not the tagging’s.phenomenon · claim-type · cross-domain-transfer · mechanism · claim-relation · replication-status · limitation — grounded in the full text| phenomenon | response priming by luminance flankers— “Response priming by luminance flankers depends neither on the actual physical luminances of the flankers nor on their subjective brightness, as assessed in a psychophysical matching task; instead, it seems to depend exclusively on the local luminance contrast of the flankers to their immediate background.” | |
| claim-type | mechanism— “Indeed, the experiment clearly shows that priming effects reverse in exactly those conditions in which the flankers’ local contrast to the background reverses, indicating that it is, indeed, local flanker-to-background contrast that drove the priming effect.” | |
| method — evidence | — “They were instructed to keep their eyes on the fixation point and to respond as quickly and correctly as possible, pressing the key on the side where the brighter target was presented.” | |
| mechanism | The feedforward sweeps triggered in turn by flankers and targets still carry only local contrast information, so motor activation is driven by raw local contrast while conscious brightness is settled later by recurrent interactions.— “this view suggests that the feedforward sweeps successively triggered by the flankers and targets are still dominated by local contrast signals.” | mechanisms[0] |
| mechanism | Conscious lightness and brightness are computed later, by recurrent processing that trails the initial feedforward wave.— “The conscious perception of lightness and brightness will be determined later in processing, probably as the result of recurrent interactions trailing behind the initial processing wave” | mechanisms[1] |
| mechanism | Response priming accesses a stimulus representation that precedes lightness constancy, i.e. one that has not yet discounted illumination.— “We adopt the less radical view that response priming reflects a stimulus representation that is earlier and less elaborate than the one underlying conscious vision and, consequently, deficient in lightness constancy.” | mechanisms[2] |
| mechanism | Placing the high-luminance flanker on the lighted segment turns it into a local decrement (and the low-luminance flanker on the shadowed segment into a local increment), which is what inverts the priming sign.— “In the attenuation condition, however, the high-luminance flanker was a local decrement because it appeared on an even more luminant background” | mechanisms[3] |
| builds-on | Moore and Brown (2001), visual search under a dark transparent filter— “Our conclusions are in agreement with a study by Moore and Brown (2001), in which visual search for highluminance and low-luminance targets was performed under conditions in which parts of the display seemed to be watched through a dark transparent filter.” | claim_relations[0] |
| contradicts | physiological studies reporting that subjective lightness is signalled early in the hierarchy (MacEvoy & Paradiso, 2001; Rossi & Paradiso, 1999; Rossi, Rittenhouse, & Paradiso, 1996)— “This conclusion might seem to conflict with some physiological studies showing that subjective lightness is signaled early in the processing hierarchy, such that the responses of many cells in the primary visual cortex (V1) and even some in the lateral geniculate nucleus are modulated by a simultaneous contrast illusion (MacEvoy & Par-rr… | claim_relations[1] |
| contradicts | Breitmeyer, Ro, and Singhal (2004), the proposal that response priming is based on raw physical stimulus characteristics rather than perceived color; the authors explicitly adopt a "less radical view" in the next sentence— “Breitmeyer, Ro, and Singhal (2004; Breitmeyer, Ö(cid:120)(cid:129) men, & Chen, 2004) have proposed that response priming is based on raw physical stimulus characteristics, such as the distribution of wavelength information, instead of perceived color. We adopt the less radical view that response priming reflects a stimulus representation… | claim_relations[2] |
| builds-on | the rapid-chase model of response priming (Schmidt et al., 2006; Schmidt & Schmidt, 2009)— “In the framework of the rapid-chase model of response priming (Schmidt et al., 2006; Schmidt & Schmidt, 2009), this view suggests that the feedforward sweeps successively triggered by the flankers and targets are still dominated by local contrast signals.” | claim_relations[3] |
| sense | A QUALITATIVE DISSOCIATION, AND IT IS A REVERSAL RATHER THAN AN ATTENUATION: `These findings indicate a qualitative dissociation between the subjective brightness of the stimuli and their propensity for priming a motor response: Even though one stimulus can appear brighter than another, it can trigger responses as if it were darker.` Not a smaller effect in one condition - the sign flips, while the observer's own brightness match goes the other way. A quantitative dissociation can be argued about with a power analysis; a reversal cannot— “These findings indicate a qualitative dissociation between the subjective brightness of the stimuli and their propensity for priming a motor response: Even though one stimulus can appear brighter than another, it can trigger responses as if it were darker” | senses[0] |
| sense | AND THE CONTROL THAT MAKES THIS DIFFERENT IN KIND FROM EVERY OTHER DISSOCIATION IN THIS CORPUS: `Note that this dissociation makes no use of visual masking or brief stimulus presentations of any kind: It is obtained even though the presented stimuli are all in plain view, and it relies solely on characteristic differences in processing dynamics between the priming and matching tasks.` dehaene1998 flashes a numeral for 43 ms between masks; marcel1983, holcomb2005 and Finkbeiner2011 all argue about whether the prime was seen. This paper lets the observer look straight at it. So the gap is not between seen and unseen but between two live representations of one visible stimulus - which is a different claim, needing none of the machinery the awareness literature spends its credibility on— “Note that this dissociation makes no use of visual masking or brief stimulus presentations of any kind: It is obtained even though the presented stimuli are all in plain view, and it relies solely on characteristic differences in processing dynamics” | senses[1] |
| sense | THE CLAIM IS A TRIPLE NEGATIVE THAT NAMES ITS WINNER: `Response priming by luminance flankers depends neither on the actual physical luminances of the flankers nor on their subjective brightness, as assessed in a psychophysical matching task; instead, it seems to depend exclusively on the local luminance contrast of the flankers to their immediate background.` The two excluded candidates are the physical variable and the perceptual variable - between them, everything anyone would have guessed - and each was excluded by a measurement rather than by an argument. The third is named, and it is a property of the stimulus's relation to its own neighbourhood— “Response priming by luminance flankers depends neither on the actual physical luminances of the flankers nor on their subjective brightness, as assessed in a psychophysical matching task; instead, it seems to depend exclusively on the local luminance contrast of the flankers to their immediate background” | senses[2] |
| sense | AND THE INFERENCE IS CAREFULLY PARTIAL: `If priming effects are in systematic disagreement with the flankers' perceived brightness values, this suggests that at least some aspects of lightness constancy are absent from the response activation process.` `at least some aspects` and `suggests` are both in the quote, and they are the difference between this and a claim that the motor pathway is pre-constancy. The illusion used here IS a consequence of lightness constancy - the authors say so - so its failure to reach the response is evidence about one pathway, not a map of the visual system— “If priming effects are in systematic disagreement with the flankers’ perceived brightness values, this suggests that at least some aspects of lightness constancy are absent from the response activation process” | senses[3] |
| control | a whole experiment (Experiment 3) built to test the local-contrast-sign account — held — rules out that responses are driven by the local contrast sign of the target rather than by the primed response— “Experiment 3 was designed to rule out responses to the target on the basis of local contrast sign.” | controls[0] |
| evidence status note | Breitmeyer, Ro, and Singhal (2004), the proposal that response priming is based on raw physical stimulus characteristics rather than perceived color; the authors explicitly adopt a "less radical view" in the next sentence — 2026-08-16: FAILED GLYPH INSIDE THIS QUOTE. Two failed glyphs inside a surname: the staged text reads "Breitmeyer, Ö(cid:120)(cid:129) men, & Chen, 2004". The author is Haluk Ogmen (O-with-diaeresis, g-with-breve), and the extraction lost both diacritic characters and left the raw font codes with a stray space. This affects only the CITED NAME, not the claim: the sentence's assertion about response priming and raw physical stimulus characteristics is intact. The quote is an exact substring of the staged file; the file is incomplete here, not the tag.— “Breitmeyer, Ro, and Singhal (2004; Breitmeyer, Ö(cid:120)(cid:129) men, & Chen, 2004) have proposed that response priming is based on raw physical stimulus characteristics, such as the distribution of wavelength information, instead of perceived color. We adopt the less radical view that response priming reflects a stimulus representation… | claim_relations[2] |
| audit | local luminance contrast —causes→ response priming — Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but priming 'seems to depend exclusively on' local contrast; hedged, and no direction is stated.— “Response priming by luminance flankers depends neither on the actual physical luminances of the flankers nor on their subjective brightness, as assessed in a psychophysical matching task; instead, it seems to depend exclusively on the local luminance contrast of the flankers to their immediate background” | concept_edges[0] |
| effect direction | local luminance contrast —causes→ response priming — increases— “Response priming by luminance flankers depends neither on the actual physical luminances of the flankers nor on their subjective brightness, as assessed in a… | concept_edges[0] |
| note | local luminance contrast —causes→ response priming — 'EXCLUSIVELY' IS IN THE QUOTE AND IT IS THE WHOLE CLAIM. Two rival causes are named and excluded in the same sentence - physical luminance and subjective brightness - so this is not 'X is associated with Y' but 'X and not the two things you would have guessed'. Weight 0.95: the general discussion's opening sentence, resting on a systematic variation of the illusion rather than on one contrast. 'increases' means more local contrast in the priming direction yields more priming, and the reversal condition is the same relation with the contrast sign flipped. | concept_edges[0] |
| weight | local luminance contrast —causes→ response priming — 0.95 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[0] |
| note | response priming —distinct-from→ subjective brightness — A REVERSAL, NOT AN ATTENUATION, AND THAT IS WHY THIS EARNS 0.95. 'distinct-from' usually records that two concepts are not the same thing; here the quote shows them moving in OPPOSITE directions on the same stimulus - one flanker appears brighter and primes as if darker. And the second sense is what makes it valuable: no masking, no brief presentation, the stimuli in plain view. Every other dissociation in this corpus separates a seen thing from an unseen thing; this separates two representations of a thing the observer is looking at. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[1] |
| weight | response priming —distinct-from→ subjective brightness — 0.95 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concept_edges[1] |
| outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation) | control — held | controls[0] |
| replication | untested | |
| limitation | Experiments 1 and 2 leave open the alternative that participants judged targets by local contrast sign rather than brightness (addressed only by Experiment 3). Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[0] |
| limitation | The dissociation licenses only the weaker conclusion that some aspects of lightness constancy are missing from response activation, not that constancy is wholly absent. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | limitations[1] |
finding · quantity · variable · definition · key-term — grounded in the full text| finding | When the illusion made the two flankers look similar in brightness, the priming effect reversed sign: consistent flankers slowed responses and inconsistent flankers speeded them. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[0] |
| finding | The same flanker could look brighter than its partner while priming the response assigned to the darker stimulus. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[1] |
| finding | Brightness matching never reversed: the physically more luminant flanker was always judged the brighter one in every illusion condition. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[2] |
| finding | Varying the light-to-shadow ratio showed that priming flipped sign in exactly the conditions where each flanker's contrast against its own background flipped from increment to decrement. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[3] |
| finding | Experiment 3 replicated the pattern with changed targets: priming strongly positive in enhancement conditions and reversed in attenuation conditions. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| evidence status note | finding — THE QUOTE STOPS WHERE THE EXTRACTED TEXT IS INTERRUPTED: after its last word the text runs into the page's running head and number, garbled in the extraction ('1566 SSCHMI 1566 CHMIDT ET AL…'), and then a figure's labels ('Attenuation Enhancement…'), so the words that completed the sentence are not continuous with it and are not quoted. | content_tags.findings[4] |
| finding | Overall, response priming tracked neither the flankers' physical luminance nor their perceived brightness, but only their local luminance contrast against the immediately surrounding background. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[5] |
| finding | The priming-perception dissociation was obtained with all stimuli fully visible, without masking or brief presentation. Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.findings[6] |
| quantity | Eight — participants in Experiment 1 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[0] |
| quantity | 1.0, 34.2, and 11.1 cd/m2 — luminances of the shadowed, lighted and neutrally illuminated segments of the folded plane in Experiment 1 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[1] |
| quantity | 17, 33, 50, 67, or 83 msec — the flanker-target SOAs used in Experiment 1 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[2] |
| quantity | 0.19% — share of Experiment 1 trials discarded as RT outliers Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[3] |
| quantity | seven steps (light–shadow contrast between 1.6 and 336.3) — range over which the light-to-shadow luminance ratio was varied in Experiment 2 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[4] |
| quantity | about 30 msec — how much faster responses were to mixed target pairs than to all-decrement or all-increment pairs in Experiment 3 Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.quantities[5] |
| variable | light–shadow contrast (independent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[1] |
| variable | RT (dependent) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[2] |
| variable | luminance levels (control) Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.variables[4] |
| definition | lightness constancy Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[1] |
| definition | rapid-chase theory of response priming Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[2] |
| definition | priming effects Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[3] |
| definition | lightness Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[4] |
| definition | brightness Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.definitions[5] |
| concept | response priming — not defined in this paper's own words; priming measured as a speeded MOTOR response rather than a judgement - and this record's point is that the two can be driven by different representations of one stimulus that is in plain view the whole time Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[0] |
| concept | subjective brightness — not defined in this paper's own words; what the observer REPORTS seeing, measured in a psychophysical matching task - and one of the two candidate causes the paper excludes by measurement rather than by argument Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[1] |
| concept | local luminance contrast — not defined in this paper's own words; THE WINNER: the flanker's contrast against its OWN immediate background, not against the other flanker and not against what the observer says it looks like. When the illusion makes a bright flanker a local decrement, the priming reverses Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[2] |
| concept | lightness constancy — not defined in this paper's own words; the mechanism that infers surface reflectance from retinal light, and the reason the illusion works at all. The paper's closing inference is that the response-activation pathway does not have all of it Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | concepts[3] |
| repeated-measures ANOVA F | as written: Repeated measures ANOVAs Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[0] |
| Greenhouse-Geisser correction p | as written: Greenhouse–Geisser-corrected p values Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[1] |
| arcsine transformation | as written: arcsine transformed Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[2] |
| standard error of the mean | as written: standard errors of the means corrected for intersubject variance Quotation withheld — this paper is not ours to reproduce, and the page has already quoted as much of it as the rights layer allows. The tag, its field and its confidence stand; the sentence is at the publisher. | content_tags.statistics[3] |
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.
Tag layer © the Meta-Tagging Project, CC BY 4.0. The paper text is © its authors/publisher
and is linked, not reproduced. Excerpts shown are short quotations for identification and verification.
· back to index
· concepts · authors
· עברית
© 2026 Shir Sivroni · ORCID 0009-0000-2597-2824