Subception: fact or artifact? a reply to Eriksen.
- 1 January 1956
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Psychological Association (APA) in Psychological Review
- Vol. 63 (5) , 343-347
- https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046434
Abstract
The arguments advanced by Eriksen (see 31: 2414) to explain the subception effect by means other than those earlier advanced by Lazarus and McCleary are examined. Various experimental tests of factors which might modify the interpretation of subception experiments are presented. It is held than an interpretation should not be discarded simply because another can explain the data equally well. The matter of interpretation should be cast into the general conceptual framework being employed by the theorist.Keywords
This publication has 3 references indexed in Scilit:
- Microgenesis and aphasia.The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1956
- Subception: fact or artifact?Psychological Review, 1956
- Autonomic discrimination without awareness: a study of subception.Psychological Review, 1951