Negate priming and multiple repetition: a reply to Grison and Strayer (2001).

Abstract

Strayer and colleagues (Grison & Strayer, 2001; Malley & Strayer 1995; Strayer & Grison, 1999) have reported experiments in which negative priming by ignored stimuli occurred onlyfor stimuli that were repeatedly sampledfrom small sets. These results were argued to be inconsistent with episodic/mismatch accounts of negative priming. We show here that a dependence of negative priming on multiple repetition is wholly consistent with such theories. Furthermore, we argue that the inhibitory theory proposed by Strayer and colleagues cannot account for major findings regarding negative priming and that anomalies in the data reported by Grison and Strayer are more parsimoniously explained by episodic/mismatch accounts.