Studying unconscious processing: Contention and consensus

François Stockart(Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique), Maor Schreiber(Tel Aviv University), Pietro Amerio(Université Libre de Bruxelles), David Carmel(Victoria University of Wellington), Axel Cleeremans(Canadian Institute for Advanced Research), Leon Y. Deouell(Hebrew University of Jerusalem), Zoltán Dienes(University of Sussex), Patxi Elosegi(Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language), Surya Gayet(Utrecht University), Alon Goldstein(University of Connecticut), Adelina-Mihaela Halchin(Cardiff University), Guido Hesselmann(Psychologische Hochschule Berlin), Ruth Kimchi(University of Haifa), Dominique Lamy(Tel Aviv University), Leyla Loued‐Khenissi(University of Lausanne), Sascha Meyen(University of Tübingen), Nitzan Micher(Tel Aviv University), Michael Pitts(Reed College), Roy Salomon(University of Haifa), Kristian Sandberg(Aarhus University), Iris A. Schnepf(University of Tübingen), Aaron Schurger(Chapman University), David R. Shanks(Language Science (South Korea)), David Soto(Ikerbasque), Amir Tal(Tel Aviv University), Darinka Trübutschek(Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics), Miguel A. Vadillo(Universidad Autónoma de Madrid), Simon van Gaal(University of Amsterdam), Itay Yaron(Tel Aviv University), Zefan Zheng(Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics), Nathan Faivre(Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique), Liad Mudrik(Canadian Institute for Advanced Research)
Behavioral and Brain Sciences
July 22, 2025
Cited by 15Open Access
Full Text

Abstract

The scope of unconscious processing has long been, and still remains, a hotly debated issue. This is driven in part by the current diversity of methods to manipulate and measure perceptual consciousness. Here, we provide ten recommendations and nine outstanding issues about designing experimental paradigms, analyzing data, and reporting the results of studies on unconscious processing. These were formed through dialogue among a group of researchers representing a range of theoretical backgrounds. We acknowledge that some of these recommendations naturally do not align with some existing approaches and are likely to change following theoretical and methodological development. Nevertheless, we hold that at this stage of the field they are instrumental in evoking a much-needed discussion about the norms of studying unconscious processes and helping researchers make more informed decisions when designing experiments. In the long run, we aim for this paper and future discussions around the outstanding issues to lead to a more convergent corpus of knowledge about the extent - and limits - of unconscious processing.


Related Papers

No related papers found

Powered by citation graph analysis