Attention
Self-Prioritization Task
Also called: self-matching task, shape-label matching task, perceptual matching task, self-prioritization effect
Measure how much faster people match a shape to themselves than to a stranger after learning three shape-person links, as response time and d' advantages for the self.
9-11 minTimed: desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 80
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 0
What it measures
Measures how much faster people match a shape to themselves than to a stranger. Participants learn which of three shapes stands for themselves, a friend and a stranger, then judge whether briefly shown shape-label pairs match.
Constructs
- Self-prioritization
- Self-relevance in perception
- Perceptual matching
Research uses
- Self-processing research in groups such as depression, anxiety and autism
- Social cognition and self-other distinction research
- Method studies of self-bias measures
How the paradigm works
The Self-Prioritization Task measures how much a newly learned link to the self speeds perceptual judgments. Sui, He and Humphreys (2012) had people learn that three geometric shapes stood for themselves, a friend and a stranger, then judge whether a shape and a label shown together matched those links. Pairs for the self were matched faster and more accurately than pairs for the other people, although the shapes had no meaning before the session. Because the links are learned during the task, it separates relevance to the self from the familiarity of one's own name or face.
More about the paradigm
This version follows that design. A circle, a square and a triangle stand for the participant, a friend and a stranger; which shape stands for whom is drawn from the session's seed, and no name or detail of a real person is asked for. Each trial shows a cross for 500 ms, then a shape above it and a label below it for 100 ms, then a blank. The participant presses F if the pair matches the links and J if it does not, within 1,200 ms of the pair's onset. "Correct", "Incorrect" or "Too slow" follows for 500 ms, and each block ends with its accuracy and a rest. Half the pairs match, and a non-matching pair shows a person's shape with each of the other two labels equally often. After 24 practice trials, 4 blocks of 60 trials (6 in the settings, as in the source) give 40 matching and 40 non-matching trials per person. The labels are written in each of the eight languages.
The main score is the self advantage: the mean time of right answers to the stranger's matching pairs minus that to the self's. Positive values mean faster matching for the self. In a reanalysis of 42 datasets (Liu and colleagues, 2025), the response-time advantage over a stranger had a large group effect (Hedges' g of 0.94), a split-half reliability of .49 and a test-retest ICC of .58, so it compares groups and conditions well and single people only roughly. The task also reports the advantage over the friend, the mean matching time for each person, d' for each person's shape from its matching and non-matching pairs, the self's d' minus the stranger's, the self's accuracy minus the stranger's, overall accuracy, missed responses and anticipations (keys under 100 ms, left out of every score). Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Self Advantage RTms
- Mean time of right answers to the stranger's matching pairs minus that to the self's.
- Positive values mean faster matching for the self; a bias, not better or worse
- Self over Friend RTms
- Mean time of right answers to the friend's matching pairs minus that to the self's.
- Positive values mean faster matching for the self
- Self Matching RTms
- Mean time of right answers to the self's matching pairs, from the pair's onset.
- Lower is faster
- Friend Matching RTms
- Mean time of right answers to the friend's matching pairs, from the pair's onset.
- Lower is faster
- Stranger Matching RTms
- Mean time of right answers to the stranger's matching pairs, from the pair's onset.
- Lower is faster
- Self d'd'
- Match answers to the self's matching pairs against Match answers to its non-matching pairs, with the log-linear correction.
- Higher means sharper matching
- Friend d'd'
- The same for the friend's shape.
- Higher means sharper matching
- Stranger d'd'
- The same for the stranger's shape.
- Higher means sharper matching
- Self Advantage d'd'
- The self's d' minus the stranger's.
- Positive values mean sharper matching for the self
- Self Advantage Accuracy%
- The share right on the self's matching pairs minus that on the stranger's; missed answers count as wrong.
- Positive values mean more accurate matching for the self
- Accuracy%
- Share of pairs answered right; missed answers count as wrong and anticipations are left out.
- Near 0.5 means guessing
- Missed Responsescount
- Pairs with no key within 1,200 ms of their onset.
- Quality check
- Anticipationscount
- Keys pressed within 100 ms of a pair's onset.
- Quality check
- Scored Trialstrials
- Test trials of the scored run.
- Quality check
Use and evidence
80 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 186% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 206 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 19 |
| 2024 | 20 |
| 2023 | 5 |
| 2022 | 18 |
| 2021 | 18 |
| 2020 | 9 |
| 2019 | 11 |
| 2018 | 4 |
| 2017 | 3 |
| 2016 | 1 |
| 2015 | 4 |
| 2014 | 1 |
| 2013 | 0 |
| 2012 | 2 |
| 2011 | 0 |
| 2010 | 0 |
| 2009 | 0 |
| 2008 | 0 |
| 2007 | 0 |
| 2006 | 0 |
| 2005 | 0 |
| 2004 | 0 |
| 2003 | 0 |
| 2002 | 0 |
| 2001 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 |
Use grade D
30 to 99 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 1
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 4
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 0
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Shapes
- A circle, a square and a triangle stand for the participant, a friend and a stranger; which shape stands for whom is drawn from the seed. No real person's name is asked for.
- Trial
- A cross for 500 ms, then a shape above it and a label below it for 100 ms, then a blank. F for a match and J for a non-match, within 1,200 ms of the pair's onset.
- Feedback
- "Correct", "Incorrect" or "Too slow" for 500 ms after every pair, and each block's accuracy at its end.
- Trials
- 24 practice trials, then 4 blocks of 60 (standard; 4 or 6): per block 10 matching and 10 non-matching pairs for each person, a non-matching pair showing each other label equally often.
- Scoring
- Right answers at or after 100 ms: the stranger's mean matching time minus the self's; d' per shape from its matching and non-matching pairs.
The labels are written in each of the eight languages, and some languages name the self in the first person (Ich in German, for example), so compare scores within a language.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: self_prioritization_trial from the scored run, F for a matching shape and label and J for a non-matching one. Half the pairs match, so chance is 1 in 2 and the keys are balanced. Below-chance accuracy, or one key on 90% of answers when accuracy is not above chance, invalidates. A pair with no key within 1,200 ms of its onset is a missed response. Missed responses and responses under 100 ms follow the timed-test rule. A session with no right answer to a matching pair of the self's or the stranger's shape has no self advantage and is flagged.
Why these rules
Accuracy significantly below chance (one-sided exact test, p < .05) cannot come from guessing; it means the response mapping was reversed or the task was not followed (Slick, Sherman and Iverson 1999 treat below-chance forced-choice performance as definite response bias). Chance-level accuracy can be a real result in impaired participants, so it is only flagged. One option on at least 90% of answered trials, when the correct options are balanced and accuracy is not above chance, means the answers did not depend on the items (the task counterpart of long-string responding in surveys; Curran 2016). Missed responses and responses under 100 ms keep the platform's timed-test rule: more than max(3, 25%) missed responses or more than max(2, 20%) responses under 100 ms invalidate, and any is flagged. A response under 100 ms cannot be a reaction to the stimulus. The self advantage compares right answers to the self's and the stranger's matching pairs, so it needs some of each.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Blocks | 4 (standard) | 4 (standard), 6 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Self-Prioritization Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Sui, He & Humphreys, 2012; Liu et al., 2025), with the standard settings (blocks: 4). The main score was self advantage RT (mean time of right answers to the stranger's matching pairs minus that to the self's).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Sui, J., He, X., & Humphreys, G. W. (2012). Perceptual effects of social salience: Evidence from self-prioritization effects on perceptual matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(5), 1105-1117. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029792
- Liu, Z., Hu, M., Zheng, Y., Sui, J., & Chuan-Peng, H. (2025). A multiverse assessment of the reliability of the self-matching task as a measurement of the self-prioritization effect. Behavior Research Methods, 57(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-024-02538-6The reliability of the scores, and the stranger as the baseline.
- Qi, Y., Zou, F., Chau, X. Y., Zhou, M., Wang, F., & Sui, J. (2025). A comprehensive dataset for investigating the structure of self-bias. Scientific Data, 12, 1755. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-025-06035-zThe trial timing.
Source papers
- Sui J, He X, Humphreys GW (2012). Perceptual effects of social salience: Evidence from self-prioritization effects on perceptual matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(5):1105-1117.Paradigm source, Adults
- Liu Z, Hu M, Zheng Y, Sui J, Chuan-Peng H (2025). A multiverse assessment of the reliability of the self-matching task as a measurement of the self-prioritization effect. Behavior Research Methods, 57(1):37.Paradigm source, Adults
- No normative data for this task.Paradigm source, N/A
Questions
How long does the Self-Prioritization Task take?
About 9 to 11 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Self Advantage RT, Self over Friend RT, Self Matching RT, Friend Matching RT, Stranger Matching RT, Self d', Friend d', Stranger d', Self Advantage d', Self Advantage Accuracy, Accuracy, Missed Responses, Anticipations and Scored Trials. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Self-Prioritization Task used in research?
80 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 186% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 206 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade D). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Self-Prioritization Task have?
In the published research, 1 paper reports its test-retest reliability and 0 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Blocks (4 (standard), 6). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese, with its words in the same language. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.