The Stroop congruency effect is more observable under a speed strategy than an accuracy strategy

Naming the ink color of an incongruent color word (e.g., RED printed in green) usually takes longer than naming the ink color of a color bar. However, when the ink matches the word (e.g., RED printed in red), naming tends to be faster. These phenomena are known as the STroop interference effect and the Stroop congruency effect, respectively. Although the interference effect has been robust and reliable across studies, the congruency effect tends to be elusive. It was hypothesized that this variation in outcomes might be related to subjects' response strategy. The experiment conducted to test this hypothesis induced either a speed or an accuracy strategy in two separate groups of subjects. Significant interference effects were found for both groups and the magnitudes did not differ. At the same time, the congruency effect was observed in the speed group but not in the accuracy group. These results suggest that researchers who wish to observe and study the Stroop congruency and interference effects should place special emphasis on speed. Implications of the study for a model of the Stroop effect are also discussed.     

A horse race of a different color: Stroop interference patterns with transformed words

Four experiments investigated Stroop interference using geometrically transformed words. Over experiments, reading was made increasingly difficult by manipulating orientation uncertainty and the number of noncolor words. As a consequence, time to read color words aloud increased dramatically. Yet, even when reading a color word was considerably slower than naming the color of ink in which the word was printed, Stroop interference persisted virtually unaltered. This result is incompatible with the simple horse race model widely used to explain color-word interference. When reading became extremely slow, a reversed Stroop effect--interference in reading the word due to an incongruent ink color--appeared for one transformation together with the standard Stroop interference. Whether or not the concept of automaticity is invoked, relative speed of processing the word versus the color does not provide an adequate overall explanation of the Stroop phenomenon.     

Hypnotic control of attention in the Stroop task: a historical footnote

Raz, Shapiro, Fan, and Posner (2002) have recently provided a compelling demonstration of enhanced attentional control under post-hypnotic suggestion. Using the classic color-word interference paradigm, in which the task is to ignore a word and to name the color in which it is printed (e.g., RED in green, say "green"), they gave a post-hypnotic instruction to participants that they would be unable to read. This eliminated Stroop interference in high suggestibility participants but did not alter interference in low suggestibility participants. replicated this pattern and further demonstrated that it is not due to a visual strategy (such as blurring or looking at a different location). As a historical footnote, we describe a "case study" from 18 years ago in which we observed the same result using a hypnotic instruction to a single highly suggestible individual that he could not read. The elimination of Stroop interference has important implications for both the study of attention and the study of hypnosis.     

Training on integrated versus separated Stroop tasks: The progression of interference and facilitation

Two experiments examined the course of interference and facilitation in the Stroop (1935) task during training. Two versions of the task were compared: integrated (e.g., the word RED in the color green) and separated (e.g., green asterisks above the word RED). Stimuli were congruent (RED in red), incongruent (GREEN in red), or neutral (XXX in red). Over 5-day (Experiment 1) and 10-day (Experiment 2) training sessions, facilitation due to congruence was small, stable, and equivalent in both task versions. In contrast, interference declined sharply on the integrated task over Days 1-3, then slowed to parallel the gradual decline on the separated task. Finally, training on the color naming task did not affect a word reading task administered after training. These findings imply that (a) Stroop interference initially reflects two problems—overcoming integration and managing two conflicting information sources; (b) with practice, the larger integration problem is solved relatively quickly, rendering the integrated and separated tasks quite comparable thereafter; and (c) facilitation and interference in the Stroop task may be independent. These results challenge extant theories of the Stroop effect, which do not predict such effects.     

Semantic Competition as the Basis of Stroop Interference:Evidence From Color-Word Matching Tasks

Abstract—A color-word matching task was used to investigate the basis of Stroop interference. Subjects were shown a pair of stimuli: an ink color (e.g., a red bar) and a colored word (e.g., RED printed in red or blue) and decided whether the two items had the same meaning (meaning decisions) or whether they had the same surface color (visual decisions). In Experiment 1, the two stimuli were shown simultaneously, and conflicting visual information of the word (e.g., RED printed in blue, against a red bar) led to interference in meaning decisions, whereas conflicting verbal information (e.g., BLUE printed in red, against a red bar) produced no interference in visual decisions. In Experiment 2, as an increasing time interval was imposed between presentation of the color bar and the colored word, interference in meaning decisions diminished, whereas interference in visual decisions was established. These results suggest that semantic competition, not response competition, is the major source of Stroop and Stroop-like interference.     

SEPARATING SPEED FROM AUTOMATICITY IN A PATIENT WITH FOCAL BRAIN ATROPHY

Abstract— Automatic processes are characterized as being rapid, as requiring little attentional effort, and as obligatory (once initialed, the activity cannot be inhibited or controlled). In contrast, controlled processes are slower, require attention, and are non-obligatory. This distinction appears in the Stroop effect the interference that appears when a person tries to name the color of the ink in which a word is printed when the word spells the name of a different color. This effect has historically been attributed to an automatic reading of the color name interfering with the slower, less automatic, naming of the ink color (MacLeod, 1991, Stroop, 1935). In this report, we describe a patient with focal brain atrophy whose speed of reading was no faster than his speed of naming colors, but who still showed the classic Stroop effect. This finding critically challenges the traditional identification of automaticity with processing speed.     

Think the thought, walk the walk - social priming reduces the Stroop effect

In the Stroop task, participants name the color of the ink that a color word is written in and ignore the meaning of the word. Naming the color of an incongruent color word (e.g., RED printed in blue) is slower than naming the color of a congruent color word (e.g., RED printed in red). This robust effect is known as the Stroop effect and it suggests that the intentional instruction – “do not read the word” – has limited influence on one’s behavior, as word reading is being executed via an automatic path. Herein is examined the influence of a non-intentional instruction – “do not read the word” – on the Stroop effect. Social concept priming tends to trigger automatic behavior that is in line with the primed concept. Here participants were primed with the social concept “dyslexia” before performing the Stroop task. Because dyslectic people are perceived as having reading difficulties, the Stroop effect was reduced and even failed to reach significance after the dyslectic person priming. A similar effect was replicated in a further experiment, and overall it suggests that the human cognitive system has more success in decreasing the influence of another automatic process via an automatic path rather than via an intentional path.     

A reach-to-touch investigation on the nature of reading in the Stroop task

In a Stroop task, participants can be presented with a color name printed in color and need to classify the print color while ignoring the word. The Stroop effect is typically calculated as the difference in mean response time (RT) between congruent (e.g., the word RED printed in red) and incongruent (GREEN in red) trials. Delta plots compare not just mean performance, but the entire RT distributions of congruent and incongruent conditions. However, both mean RT and delta plots have some limitations. Arm-reaching trajectories allow a more continuous measure for assessing the time course of the Stroop effect. We compared arm movements to congruent and incongruent stimuli in a standard Stroop task and a control task that encourages processing of each and every word. The Stroop effect emerged over time in the control task, but not in the standard Stroop, suggesting words may be processed differently in the two tasks.     

Comparing perception of Stroop stimuli in focused versus divided attention paradigms: Evidence for dramatic processing differences

A huge set of focused attention experiments show that when presented with color words printed in color, observers report the ink color faster if the carrier word is the name of the color rather than the name of an alternative color, the Stroop effect. There is also a large number (although not so numerous as the Stroop task) of so-called “redundant targets studies” that are based on divided attention instructions. These almost always indicate that observers report the presence of a visual target (‘redness’ in the stimulus) faster if there are two replications of the target (the word RED in red ink color) than if only one is present (RED in green or GREEN in red). The present set of four experiments employs the same stimuli and same participants in both designs. Evidence supports the traditional interference account of the Stroop effect, but also supports a non-interference parallel processing account of the word and the color in the divided attention task. Theorists are challenged to find a unifying model that parsimoniously explains both seemingly contradictory results.     

Object-based attentional selection can modulate the Stroop effect

The Stroop (1935) effect is the inability to ignore a color word when the task is to report the ink color of that word (i.e., to say "green" to the word RED in green ink). The present study investigated whether object-based processing contributes to the Stroop effect. According to this view, observers are unable to ignore irrelevant features of an attended object (Kahneman & Henik, 1981). In three experiments, participants had to name the color of one of two superimposed rectangles and to ignore words that appeared in the relevant object, in the irrelevant object, or in the background. The words were congruent, neutral, or incongruent with respect to the correct color response. Words in the irrelevant object and in the background produced significant Stroop effects, consistent with earlier findings. Importantly, however, words in the relevant object produced larger Stroop effects than did the other conditions, suggesting amplified processing of all the features of an attended object. Thus, object-based processing can modulate the Stroop effect.     

The locus of semantic interference in the “Stroop” color-naming task

In two experiments, introductory psychology students responded in two ways to three lists of 60 words printed in different colors. The lists consisted of color words and two sets of words associated with the colors (e.g., SKY, BLOOD, etc.). When the subjects responded by naming the color in which each word was printed, it took longer for the color word list than for either list of associates, i.e., the classical Stroop interference effect. The other response required the subjects to say words from one of the association lists which corresponded to the color in which each word was printed, e.g., they saw the word BLACK (or NIGHT, or COAL) printed inred ink, and had to respond by saying “blood.” Using this response, it took longest for the subjects to complete the list of words which were the same as those required as responses. Color words were somewhat less difficult, and the other association words were completed most quickly. The results do not pinpoint the locus of interference, but clarify additional assumptions which must be accepted to maintain alternative hypotheses.     

Word reading practice reduces Stroop interference in children

Stroop interference is thought to index reading automaticity and is expected to increase with reading practice and to decrease with improved color naming. We investigated the effects of practice in word reading and color naming on interference in 92 adults and 109 children in Grades 4–5. For children, interference was reduced after reading practice with color words. In neither group was interference affected by practice in color naming of neutral stimuli. These findings are consistent with a direct negative relationship between reading ability and interference and challenge the automaticity account in favor of a blocking mechanism whereby interference is determined by the delay to inhibit the reading response rather than by the efficiency of color naming.     

STROOP INTERFERENCE AND COLOR-WORD SIMILARITY

Abstract— Stroop interference refers to the finding that it takes longer to name the color of an incongruent color (e g, the word blue shown in green) than it does to name the color of a neutral stimulus (e g, a series of number signs shown in green) Incongruent color-word stimuli can differ in the similarity between the color in which the word is printed and the color denoted by the word (e g, the ward blue shown in green vs yellow) This research shows that the amount of interference obtained is related to color-word similarity, suggesting that word-reading and color-naming processes interact at a conceptual level prior to response emission.     

Differences between Chinese morphosyllabic and German alphabetic readers in the Stroop interference effect

The goal of our study was to localize the source of the stronger Stroop interference effect found in morphosyllabic readers as compared with alphabetic readers. Twenty-three Chinese and 24 German undergraduate students were tested in a Stroop paradigm with the following stimuli: color patches, colorneutral words (e.g.,friend printed in yellow), incongruent color-associated words (e.g.,blood printed in blue), and incongruent color words (e.g.,yellow printed in blue). Results revealed no differences in German and Chinese students’ response times to color patches. Chinese participants, however, showed longer color naming latencies for neutral words as well as for color words and color-related words. No differences between German and Chinese participants were found when print color latencies for neutral words were subtracted from print color latencies for color words and color-related words. This result does not support theories which suggest that for morphosyllabic readers there is a direct route from orthography to the semantics of a word. We rather argue, with reference to dual route models of reading, that access from print to phonology is faster for morphosyllabic than for alphabetic readers, and therefore interference caused by conflicting phonologies of color name and written word will be stronger in Chinese readers than in German readers.     

Reading ability is negatively related to Stroop interference

Stroop interference is often taken as evidence for reading automaticity even though young and poor readers, who presumably lack reading automaticity, present strong interference. Here the relationship between reading skills and Stroop interference was studied in a 7th-grade sample. Greater interference was observed in children diagnosed with reading disability (dyslexia) than in unimpaired children. Moreover, poorer reading skills were found to correlate with greater Stroop interference in the general school population. In correlation and regression analyses, interference was primarily associated with reading speed, with an additional unique contribution of reading accuracy. Color naming errors were few and not comparably related to reading skills. The relation of reading skill to Stroop interference was examined in computational modeling simulations. The production model of Roelofs [Roelofs, A. (2003). Goal-referenced selection of verbal action: modeling attentional control in the Stroop task. Psychological Review, 110, 88-125], in which interference is primarily due to word stimuli having direct access to word form encoding whereas color naming must pass through concept activation and lemma selection, was found to account well for the human data after imposing covariation constraints on parameters controlling word processing and blocking latency, in modifications not affecting the model's previous fit to other data. The connectionist model of Cohen, Dunbar, and McClelland [Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97, 332-361], in which interference is caused by differential route strength, implementing an automaticity account, approximated the observed patterns with network-wide parameter manipulations not specific to reading, such as processing speed and response threshold, likely to affect previously optimized performance. On the basis of the empirical and modeling data we argue for a direct link between reading skill and interference, beyond the effects of executive functioning.     

Tests of the automaticity of reading: dilution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli

A color word shown next to a color bar can facilitate color naming if it is congruent with the correct response; otherwise it will interfere with color naming. The congruence and conflict effects are both diminished (diluted) by the presentation of a color-neutral word elsewhere in the field. A row of X's also produces some dilution. The dilution effect represents attentional interference rather than sensory interaction or response conflict. Because Stroop effects are susceptible to interference, the involuntary reading of color words does not satisfy one of the standard criteria of automaticity.     

材料类型和颜色典型性影响颜色-物体Stroop效应

通过两个实验考查材料类型和颜色典型性对颜色-物体Stroop效应的影响。实验1,考查颜色-物体（图片）Stroop效应。结果颜色典型性差异显著,命名图片的颜色和图片的名称都产生显著的颜色-物体Stroop效应。实验2,考查颜色-物体（词语）Stroop效应。结果颜色典型性差异显著,命名词语的颜色产生颜色-物体Stroop效应,命名词语的名称未产生颜色-物体Stroop效应。结论,材料类型和颜色典型性影响颜色-物体Stroop效应。     

Color-object interference in young children: A Stroop effect in children 3½-6½ years old

The Stroop color–word task cannot be administered to children who are unable to read. However, our color–object Stroop task can. One hundred and sixty-eight children of 3½–6½ years (50% female; 24 children at each 6-month interval) were shown line drawings of familiar objects in a color that was congruent (e.g., an orange carrot), incongruent (e.g., a green carrot), or neutral (for objects having no canonical color [e.g., a red book]), and abstract shapes, each drawn in one of six colors. Half the children were asked to name the color in which each object was drawn, and half were to name each object. Children's predominant tendency was to say what the object was; when instructed to do otherwise they were slower and less accurate. Children were faster and more accurate at naming the color of a stimulus when the form could not be named (abstract shape) than when it could, even if in its canonical color. The heightened interference to color-naming versus object-naming was not due to lack of familiarity with color names or group differences: Children in the color condition were as fast and accurate at naming the colors of abstract shapes as were children in the form condition at naming familiar objects.     

Skeletal structure of printed words: evidence from the stroop task

Do readers encode the sequencing of consonant (C) and vowel (V) phonemes (skeletal structure) in printed words? The authors used the Stroop task to examine readers' sensitivity to skeletal structure. In Experiment 1, CVC nonwords (e.g., pof) facilitated the naming of colors with congruent frames (e.g., red, a CVC word) but not with incongruent ones (e.g., green). In Experiment 2, the color black (a CCVC frame) was named faster with a congruent CCVC frame (e.g., grof) compared to either CCVCC (e.g., groft) or CVC (e.g., gof) incongruent controls. Finally, in Experiment 3, the color pink (a CVCC frame) was named faster with a CVCC frame (e.g., goft) compared to either CCVCC or CVC incongruent controls. In most cases, congruent frames shared no segments with the color name. These findings demonstrate that readers automatically assemble the skeletal structure of printed words.     

Independent race of colour and word can predict the Stroop effect

Mainstream theories of the Stroop effect suggest that faster colour classification on congruent trials (say, the word RED printed in red colour) relative to incongruent trials (GREEN in red) is due to channel interaction. Namely, information from the irrelevant word channel perturbs processing of the print colour, causing in turn slower processing of incongruent displays. In this note, I advance a new model in which colour and word are processed in parallel and completely independent channels. The Stroop effect is then the outcome of signal redundancy in congruent displays, where both colour and word contribute to the same response. Numerical computations show that the model can produce the Stroop effect (along with high accuracy rates) for a subset of parameter values. Thus, it provides a proof of existence for a separate channel theory, and a challenge to many existing theories.