An interesting issue concerns the influence (i.e., priming effect) that the unconsciously processed shape of a Kanizsa's figure can exert on the perception of a real masking figure. To our knowledge, no study has addressed this problem. Only one study (Barlasov-Ioffe & Hochstein,
2009), using a prime-matching paradigm, evaluated whether a sequentially created illusory figure could facilitate a participant's performance in a subsequent same-different shape-discrimination task. In this study the illusory figure was rendered invisible by using an extension of the method proposed by Rock and Linnet (
1993) in which the inducers (Pac-Men) that constitute the illusory figure were presented separately and sequentially, either in screen or in retinal coordinates, with the result that participants were not able to perceive the illusory figure. Despite that, the illusory figure facilitated performance in the matching task in the retinal-coordinates condition. Barlasov-Ioffe and Hochstein (
2009) proposed that the priming effect does not depend on the processing of the illusory contours but solely on the SR. In accord with this possibility Stanley and Rubin (
2003,
2005), proposed that the SR and the illusory contours are independently processed by the visual system: The former at high cortical level by the lateral occipital complex (LOC) and the latter by early visual areas V1 and V2 by means of feedback projections reentering from LOC. This interpretation is in agreement with Mendola, Dale, Fischl, Liu, and Tootell (
1999) who found differential processing of illusory contours and coherent shapes within LOC. Also Murray et al. (
2002), on the basis of the latency of visual evoked potentials, proposed a model supporting the idea of an initial processing of the SR by LOC, followed by a subsequent processing of the illusory contours carried out by V1 and V2 via feedback projections (see also Grill-Spector & Kanwisher,
2001). Barlasov-Ioffe and Hochstein's (
2008) hypothesis that the SR is the crucial element yielding the priming effect is also in keeping with Bar and Biederman's (
1999) findings, indicating the human homologue of macaque V4 visual area, which is very close to LOC, as the neural locus of subliminal priming.