This chapter discusses the main types of so-called ’subjective measures of consciousness’ used in current-day science of consciousness. After explaining the key worry about such measures, namely the problem of an ever-present response bias, I discuss the question of whether subjective measures of consciousness are introspective. I show that there is no clear answer to this question, as proponents of subjective measures do not employ a worked-out notion of subjective access. In turn, this makes the problem of response bias less (...) tractable than it might otherwise be. (shrink)

Consciousness can be measured in various ways, but different measures often yield different conclusions about the extent to which awareness relates to performance. Here, we compare five different subjective measures of awareness in the context of an artificial grammar learning task. Participants expressed their subjective awareness of rules using one of five different scales: confidence ratings , post-decision wagering , feeling of warmth , rule awareness , and continuous scale . All scales were equally sensitive to conscious knowledge. PDW, however, (...) was affected by risk aversion, and both RAS and SDS applied different minimal criteria for rule awareness. CR seems to capture the largest range of consciousness, but failed to indicate unconscious knowledge with the guessing criterion. We close by discussing the theoretical implications of scale sensitivity and propose that CR’s unique features enable a finer assessment of subjective states of awareness. (shrink)

What is a bias? Standard philosophical views of both implicit and explicit bias focus this question on the representations one harbours, for example, stereotypes or implicit attitudes, rather than the ways in which those representations are manipulated. I call this approach representationalism. In this paper, I argue that representationalism taken as a general theory of psychological social bias is a mistake, because it conceptualizes bias in ways that do not fully capture the phenomenon. Crucially, this view fails to capture a (...) heretofore neglected possibility of bias, one that influences an individual’s beliefs about or actions toward others, but is, nevertheless, nowhere represented in that individual’s cognitive repertoire. In place of representationalism, I develop a functional account of psychological social bias which characterizes it as a mental entity that takes propositional mental states as inputs and returns propositional mental states as outputs in a way that instantiates social-kind inductions. This functional characterization leaves open which mental states and processes bridge the gap between the inputs and outputs, ultimately highlighting the diversity of candidates that can serve this role. (shrink)

Block [Block, N. . Two neural correlates of consciousness. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 46–52] and Snodgrass claim that a signal detection theory analysis of qualitative difference paradigms, in particular the exclusion failure paradigm, reveals cases of phenomenal consciousness without access consciousness. This claim is unwarranted on several grounds. First, partial cognitive access rather than a total lack of cognitive access can account for exclusion failure results. Second, Snodgrass’s Objective Threshold/Strategic model of perception relies on a problematic ‘enable’ approach to (...) perception that denies the possibility of intentional control of unconscious perception and any effect of following different task instructions on the presence/absence of phenomenal consciousness. Many of Block’s purported examples of phenomenal consciousness without cognitive access also rely on this problematic approach. Third, qualitative difference paradigms may index only a subset of access consciousness. Thus, qualitative difference paradigms like exclusion failure cannot be used to isolate phenomenal consciousness, any attempt to do so still faces serious methodological problems. (shrink)

Do perceiving subjects represent kind properties in the content of their conscious visual experience when they see and recognize instances of those natural kinds? In Part 1 of my thesis I clarify this question, in Part 2 I answer it, and in Part 3 I raise a problem for previous answers. Part 1 conceives of conscious experience in an internalist way, and the unified conscious episode does not exclude having beliefs about what one sees. Following Siegel and Bayne, Part 2 (...) formulates two arguments in support of representing kind properties in the content of experience. In Part 3, I argue that attempts to distinguish visual experiences from visual beliefs might fail to account for the interplay of sensory and cognitive elements in visual object recognition. I conclude by suggesting it has not been established that visual experiences can be distinguished from visual beliefs. (shrink)

MS, under submission, derived from a Powerpoint presentation at a Conference on Consciousness, Memory, and Perception, in honor of Larry Weiskrantz, City University, London, September 15, 2006.

In this paper I will analyse the relationship between metaphor and imagination. This issue has been recently studied by cognitive linguists who appreciate its importance, while other semantic perspectives neglect it. I will analyse the thesis which affirms that metaphors are based on cognitive components which are not logical-propositional but imaginative: the “image schemata” are recurrent models of corporeal experiences, centres of knowledge organization which structure – in a non-propositional form – an amount of salient information. This information emerges from (...) the sensorimotor activities such as: manipulation of objects, spatial orientation and focusing perceptive attention on different goals. According to this theory, imagination is the drive of the entire cognitive experience and, through metaphorical projection, it activates and coordinates the schemata from which the very linguistic activity originates. Starting with empirical studies about the cognitive and neurobiological plausibility of image schemata, I will assert the function of imagination as the trait d’union between experience and cognitive use of the metaphor, through the use of sensory and synesthetic metaphors as mediators among perceptive, physical and linguistic dimensions. I hope future research will concentrate on the relationship between synesthesia and image schemata because of their strong connection with human perceptive, cognitive and neural structures. (shrink)

The present work is concerned with a phenomenon referred to as contextual cueing. In visual search, if a searched-for target object is consistently encountered within a stable spatial arrangement of distractor objects, detecting the target becomes more efficient over time, relative to non-repeated, random arrangements. This effect is attributed to learned target-distractor spatial associations stored in long-term memory, which expedite visual search. This Thesis investigates four aspects of contextual cueing: Study 1 tackled the implicit-explicit debate of contextual cueing from a (...) new perspective. Previous studies tested explicit access to learned displays by applying a recognition test, asking observers whether they have seen a given display in the previous search task. These tests, however, typically yield mixed findings and there is an on-going controversy whether contextual cueing can be described as an implicit or an explicit effect. The current study applied the new perspective of metacognition to contextual cueing and combined a contextual cueing task with metacognitive ratings about the clarity of the visual experience, either of the display configuration or the target stimulus. Bayesian analysis revealed that there was an effect of repeated context on metacognitive sensitivity for configuration, but not target, ratings. It was concluded that effects of contextual memory on metacognition are content-specific and lead to increased metacognitive access to the display configuration, but not to the target stimulus. The more general implication is that from the perspective of metacognition, contextual cueing can be considered as an explicit effect. Study 2 aimed at testing how explicit knowledge affects memory-guided visual search. Two sets of search displays were shown to participants: explicit and implicit displays. Explicit displays were introduced prior to the search experiment, in a dedicated learning session, and observers should deliberately learn these displays. Implicit displays, on the other hand, were first shown in the search experiment and learning was incidental through repeated exposure to these displays. Contextual cueing arising from explicit and implicit displays was assessed relative to a baseline condition of non-repeated displays. The results showed a standard contextual cueing effect for explicit displays and, interestingly, a negative cueing effect for implicit displays. Recognition performance was above chance for both types of repeated displays; however, it was higher for explicit displays. This pattern of results confirmed – in part – the predictions of a single memory model of attention-moderated associative learning, in which different display types compete for behavior and explicit representations block the retrieval of implicit representations. Study 3 investigates interactions between long-term contextual memory with short-term perceptual hypotheses. Both types of perceptual memory share high similarities with respect to their content, therefore the hypothesis was formulated that they share a common memory resource. In three experiments of interrupted search with repeated and non-repeated displays, it was shown that contextual cueing expedites performance in interrupted search; however, there was no interaction of contextual cueing with the generation or the confirmation of perceptual hypotheses. Rather, the analysis of fixational eye movements showed that long-term memory exerts its influence on search performance upon the first glance of a given display, essentially affecting the starting point of the search process. The behavior of approaching the target stimulus is then a product of generating and confirming perceptual hypotheses with these processes being unaffected by long-term contextual memory. It was concluded that long-term and short-term memory representations of the same search display are independent and exhibit additive effects on search performance. Study 4 is concerned with the effects of reward on perceptual learning. It was argued that rewarding repeated displays in a contextual cueing paradigm leads to an acceleration of the learning effect; however, it was not considered whether reward also has an effect in non-repeated displays. In these displays, at least the target position is kept constant while distractor configurations are random across repetitions. Usually this is done in order to account for target position-specific probability learning in contextual cueing. However, it is possible that probability learning itself is modulated by reward. The current experiment introduced high or low reward to repeated and importantly, also non-repeated displays. It was shown that reward had a huge effect on non-repeated displays, indicating that rewarding certain target positions, irrespective of the distractor layout, facilitates RT performance. Interestingly, reward effects were even larger for non-repeated compared to repeated displays. It was concluded that reward has a strong effect on probability-, and not context learning. (shrink)