Literature DB >> 25068037

The Role of Visual Stimuli in Cross-Modal Stroop Interference.

Danielle A Lutfi-Proctor1, Emily M Elliott1, Nelson Cowan2.   

Abstract

It has long been known that naming the color of a color word leads to what is known as the Stroop effect (Stroop, 1935). In the traditional Stroop task, when compared to naming the color of a color-neutral stimulus (e.g. an X or color patch), the presence of an incongruent color word decreases performance (Stroop interference), and a congruent color word increases performance (Stroop facilitation). Research has also shown that auditory color words can impact the color naming performance of colored items in a similar way in a variation known as cross-modal Stroop (Cowan & Barron, 1987). However, whether the item that is colored interacts with the auditory distractor to affect cross-modal Stroop interference is unclear. Research with the traditional, visual Stroop task has suggested that the amount of color the visual item displays and the semantic and phonetic components of the colored word can affect the magnitude of the resulting Stroop interference; as such, it is possible the same components could play a role in cross-modal Stroop interference. We conducted two experiments to examine the impact of the composition of the colored visual item on cross-modal Stroop interference. However, across two different experiments, three test versions, and numerous sets of trials, we were only able to find a small effect of the visual stimulus. This finding suggests that while the impact of the auditory stimuli is consistent and robust, the influence of non-word visual stimuli is quite small and unreliable and, while occasionally being statistically significant, it is not practically so.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cross-modal Stroop; Stroop interference; auditory distractors; dimension strength; habituation

Year:  2014        PMID: 25068037      PMCID: PMC4109324          DOI: 10.1002/pchj.51

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psych J        ISSN: 2046-0252


  29 in total

1.  Coloring single stroop elements: reducing automaticity or slowing color processing?

Authors:  J S Monahan
Journal:  J Gen Psychol       Date:  2001-01

2.  The importance of semantic similarity to the irrelevant speech effect.

Authors:  C B Neely; D C LeCompte
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-01

3.  Disruption of comprehension by the meaning of irrelevant sound.

Authors:  C J Oswald; S Tremblay; D M Jones
Journal:  Memory       Date:  2000-09

4.  The irrelevant sound phenomenon revisited: what role for working memory capacity?

Authors:  C Philip Beaman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Disruption of writing processes by the semanticity of background speech.

Authors:  Patrik Sörqvist; Anatole Nöstl; Niklas Halin
Journal:  Scand J Psychol       Date:  2012-01-27

6.  The stroop effect and the myth of automaticity.

Authors:  D Besner; J A Stolz; C Boutilier
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1997-06

7.  The reality of cross-modal Stroop effects.

Authors:  N Cowan
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1989-01

8.  Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon.

Authors:  M O Glaser; W R Glaser
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Cross-modal selective attention: on the difficulty of ignoring sounds at the locus of visual attention.

Authors:  C Spence; J Ranson; J Driver
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2000-02

10.  Automaticity in reading and the Stroop task: testing the limits of involuntary word processing.

Authors:  Tracy L Brown; Kelly Joneleit; Cathy S Robinson; Carli Rose Brown
Journal:  Am J Psychol       Date:  2002
View more
  1 in total

1.  Multisensory Integration Strategy for Modality-Specific Loss of Inhibition Control in Older Adults.

Authors:  Ahreum Lee; Hokyoung Ryu; Jae-Kwan Kim; Eunju Jeong
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.390

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.