Understanding the intervener effect in masked priming
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the masked priming paradigm, responses to a target are faster if the prime and target are identical (repetition priming). Forster (submitted) provides evidence that repetition priming consists of a semantic component, due to the shared meaning of the prime and target, and an orthographic component, due to the shared letters. When an unmasked unrelated word intervenes between the prime and target, repetition priming was reduced, but orthographic priming was unaffected. When this intervener was masked, repetition priming was reduced whereas orthographic priming was eliminated. The unmasked intervener may block a semantic component of priming, and a masked intervener blocks the orthographic component. Experiment 1 replicated Forster’s results and confirmed the results were not due to an SOA confound. Experiment 2 included semantically-related primes in an attempt to examine the intervener’s effect on semantic priming, however, our materials did not yield semantic priming even when no intervener was present.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it