Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Design of the experiment. A, Each participant completed this experiment in the same sequence. B, In the no-report condition, the green ring was the target. Participants had to report how many times they saw the green ring. In the report condition, participants answered questions with regard to the Gabor grating they saw trial by trial. C, Each trial started with 300 ms of fixation followed by 33 ms of the stimulus, and then 1300 ms of ITI. ITI, Intertrial interval.
- Figure 2.
Results from both conditions in experiment 1a. The percentage correct (i.e., performance) is plotted on the y-axis. A, The proportion that the participants correctly counted the pop-out times of the green ring. B, Performance on the Gabor grating task in the report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.097%). SE, Standard error.
- Figure 3.
A, Perceived contrasts in the incidental memory tasks within all conditions. Three levels in Times: 4, 6, 8; two levels in Levels: 0.3, 0.9; two levels in R/NR: No-report, Report. y-axis: contrast of the Gabor grating; x-axis: conditions. B, Comparison between the performances in the no-report (SD = 0.16) and report conditions (SD = 0.17) of each participant. y-axis: contrast of the Gabor grating; x-axis: conditions. SD, Standard deviation.
- Figure 4.
Results from both conditions in experiment 1b. In all plots, percentage correct (i.e., performance) is plotted on the y-axis. A, Performance on the 45° incline/135° incline/blank task in the first report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.27%). B, Performance on the 45° incline/135° incline/blank task in the second report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.28%). SE, Standard error.
- Figure 5.
A, Perceived contrasts in the incidental memory tasks within all conditions. Three levels in Times: 4, 6, 8; two levels in Levels: 0.3, 0.9; two levels in R1/R2: first Report Condition, second Report Condition. y-axis: contrast of the Gabor grating; x-axis: conditions. B, Comparison between the performances in the first report (SD = 0.26) and the second report (SD = 0.21) conditions of each participant. y-axis: contrast of the Gabor grating; x-axis: conditions. SD, Standard deviation.
- Figure 6.
Results from all conditions in experiment 2. In all plots, percentage correct (i.e., performance) is plotted on the y-axis. A, Performance on the green ring counting task in the no-report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.54%). B, Performance on the 45° incline/135° incline/blank task in the report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.19%). C, Performance on the 45° incline/135° incline/blank task in the lower-contrast report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.23%). SE, Standard error.
- Figure 7.
Boxplot with paired data; *p < 0.05. Two levels in Levels: 0.3, 0.9; two levels in Condition: no-report condition, report condition. y-axis: contrast of the Gabor grating; x-axis: conditions.
- Figure 8.
In both plots, reported contrast of the stimuli is plotted on the y-axis. A, Average perceived contrast after the report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.21%). B, Average perceived contrast after the lower-contrast report condition. The error bar indicates the SE (0.16%). SE, Standard error.
- Figure 9.
ERP results for no-report (top row; A), report (middle row; B), and lower-contrast report (bottom row; C) conditions. For all conditions, topographical voltage distributions over a series of time windows and waveforms from a representative (Pz) electrode are plotted. Gray curves reflect the ERP of the critical stimuli, red curves reflect the ERP of blanks. Gray areas represent the ROIs of P3b. In both report and lower-contrast report conditions, clear P3b amplitudes could be observed during the 300- to 400-ms time window while critical stimuli were presented. However, the P3b amplitude vanished in the no-report condition regardless of whether the participants saw the stimuli or not. *p < 0.05. Amplitude scales for the topography maps are as follows: A, ±0.3 μV (P1); ±0.4 μV (N1); ±0.7 μV (P2); ±0.4 μV (P3b); B, ±0.15 μV (P1); ±0.4 μV (N1); ±1.0 μV (P2); ± 0.6 μV (P3b); C, ±0.2 μV (P1); ±0.4 μV (N1); ±1.0 μV (P2); ±0.6 μV (P3b).
- Figure 10.
A–C, Results from the mass univariate analyses for all conditions. A, No-report condition. B, Report condition. C, Lower-contrast report condition. Each individual electrode is plotted as a row on the y-axis, while time (in seconds) is plotted on the x-axis. Only significant t values (5% FDR) are plotted in this figure. FDR, False discovery rate.
- Figure 11.
ERP differences during late time windows revealed by exploratory analyses for all conditions. The topographical differential voltage distributions over a series of time windows starting at 300 ms and ending at 1000 ms are shown for all the conditions. A, No-report condition. B, Report condition. C, Lower-contrast report condition.
- Figure 12.
Source estimations of the differences between stimulus and blank for all conditions across four late time windows. A, No-report condition. B, Report condition. C, Lower-contrast report condition. The ERPs of the blank were served as the baseline, only differences bigger than 2 × 10−10 voltage are plotted on the lateral surface of the Montreal Neurologic Institute brain. Areas plotted by orange color reflect amplitudes of the stimulus bigger than amplitudes of the blank. For those areas colored by purple, the amplitudes of the stimulus were smaller than blank.
Tables
Contrast level Weber contrast 0 0 0.1 0.09 0.2 0.23 0.3 0.41 0.4 0.57 0.5 0.71 0.6 0.95 0.7 1.15 0.8 1.35 0.9 1.52 1 1.87 Conditions Times Levels No-report Report 4 0.3 N = 8 0.9 N = 8 6 0.3 N = 8 0.9 N = 8 8 0.3 N = 8 0.9 N = 8 A mixed model design for three-factors. Times: pop-out times of green ring; Levels: the contrast levels of the Gabor gratings at the beginning in the incidental memory task; N: numbers of the participants. A total of 48 participants were divided into six groups, which is the combination of the three levels in Times and the two levels in Levels. All participants completed both no-report condition and report condition.
Source df1 df2 F-ratio p-value η2 Times 2 38 0.292 0.749 0.008 Levels 1 38 1.177 0.285 0.016 R/NR 1 38 45.35 5.64e-08** 0.361 Times × Levels 2 38 0.596 0.556 0.016 Times × R/NR 2 38 0.316 0.731 0.008 Levels × R/NR 1 38 0.082 0.776 0.001 Times × Levels × R/NR 2 38 0.634 0.536 0.016 **p < 0.01.
Sources df1 df2 F-ratio p-value η2 Levels 1 17 2.427 0.138 0.068 R/NR 1 17 4.631 0.046* 0.118 Levels × R/NR 1 17 0.615 0.444 0.017 *p < 0.05.
In this issue
