EFFECTS OF PRACTICE ON STROOP CONGRUITY
Steve S. Monahan Central The state of michigan University, [email protected] cmich. edu
Automaticity, both examining and response, response competition, translation models, and the imbalance/uncertainty model of the Stroop impact were researched. Two individuals received 4 weeks of important press practice using regular Stroop stimuli. Tests of RT to standard Stroop, Single colored letter, and Stroop dilution stimuli were conducted before and after each week of practice applying both important press and vocal responding. After the last practice additionally, they were tested on change Stroop stimuli. The benefits support response competition and partially support response automaticity, Sugg and McDonald's (1994) translation unit, and the imbalance/uncertainty model and fail to support the mental set hypothesis of Besner, Stolz, and Boutilier (1997).
The Stroop effect may be the interference of words with indicating colour in which the words are presented. Theories of the Stroop effect include automaticity theory, equally reading and response automaticity, response competition, translation theory, imbalance/uncertainty, and mental set. Automaticity The most common theory from the Stroop result, automaticity (Stirling, 1977), is dependent on the idea that through long practice reading becomes an automatic procedure and does not will need controlled attention to occur. Programmed reading uses some attention resources, and therefore reduces the time available to method and identity stimulus color. Stirling (1977) also introduced the concept of response automaticity. This individual showed that changing the responses coming from color words and phrases to words that were not really part of the color words increased RT and reduced Stroop interference. With letter response practice, RT and Stroop interference with letter replies became more like those with color word reactions. Response Competition Eriksen and Eriksen's (1974) theory of response competition posits the notion that when a stimulus primes both the correct and an incorrect response, the responses be competitive for the only response route and the wrong response should be suppressed prior to correct response can be built. With Stroop stimuli, the colour word and also the color itself primes a reply. Thus for incongruent stimuli a correct (color) as well as an incorrect (word) response is set up and the phrase response has to be suppressed. Nealis (1974) promises that both equally congruent and incongruent stimuli produce response competition. Translation Models In respect to translation models (Glaser & Glaser, 1989; Sugg & McDonald, 1994; Virzi & Egeth, 1985) color and phrases are refined via separate modules: semantic memory which include concept nodes that are connected by semantic relationships processes color and a lexicon with term nodes which might be linked simply by non-semantic relationships
processes words and phrases. Interference is produced if perhaps more than one potential response node is turned on by a stimulation. There are two-way links between your modules. An assumption is done that notion of and responses to colors pictures have happy direct access through semantic storage and that words and phrases, whether voiced or written, have privileged direct access through the lexicon. Disturbance is obtained only if the irrelevant stimulation aspect provides privileged entry to the module necessary for response selection. If an incongruent Stroop stimulus requiring vocal response occurs (e. g. REDDISH COLORED in blue) the word RED is processed by the lexicon, and the color blue can be processed by simply semantic memory. The vocal response must be made through the lexicon, thus the semantic memory client must be converted into a phrase node in the lexicon before one can state " green, вЂќ which usually translation needs extra digesting. Similarly, in case the response requires pressing a button labeled while using word, it will have interference since the color has to be translated right into a word node in the lexicon before one can press the " blueвЂќ button, which in turn translation again...
References: Besner, D. & Stolz, L. A. (1999). Unconsciously manipulated processing: The Stroop impact reconsidered. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6(3), 449-455. Besner, D., Stoltz, J. A., & Boutilier, C. (1997). The Stroop effect as well as the myth of automaticity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, four, 221-225. Eriksen, B. A. & Eriksen, C. T. (1974). Associated with noise letters on identification of a goal letter within a nonsearch job. Perception & Psychophysics, sixteen, 143-149. Garner, W. L. (1983). Uneven interaction of stimulus measurements in perceptual information control. In Big t. J. Tighe & N. E. Shepp (Eds. ), Perception, honnetete, and advancement: Interaction studies (pp. 1-37). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Glaser, W. R. & Glaser, M. Um. (1989). Framework effects in Stroop-like word and picture digesting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(1), 13-42. Loftus, G. 3rd there’s r. & Masson, M. At the. J. (1994). Using self-confidence intervals in within subject matter designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, you, 476-490. Monahan, J. S i9000. (2001). Colour single Stroop elements: Minimizing automaticity or slowing color processing? Diary of General Psychology, 128(1), 98-112. Sabri, M., Melara, R. D., & Algom, D. (2001) A confluence of situations: Asymmetric compared to global inability of selective attention to Stroop dimensions. Log of Fresh Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(3), 515-537 Sharma, Deb. & McKenna, F. P. (1998). Gear components of the manual and vocal Stroop tasks. Recollection & Experience, 26(5), 1033-1040. Stirling, And. (1979). Stroop interference: An input and an end result phenomenon. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31, 121-132. Sugg, Meters. J. & McDonald, M. E. (1994). Time course of inhibition in color-response and word-response variations of the Stroop task. Record of Trial and error Psychology: Individual Perception and Performance, 20(3), 647-675.
I thank Jennifer Hurtubise, Yi-Ching Shelter, and Barbara Taratuta for help in performing this examine.