Literature DB >> 33236285

Response competition better explains Stroop interference than does response exclusion.

Ardi Roelofs1.   

Abstract

Researchers debate whether Stroop interference from an incongruent word in color-naming response time is caused by response competition or by response exclusion. According to the former account, the interference reflects competition in lexical response selection during color name planning, whereas according to the latter, the interference reflects the removal of a motor program for the incongruent word from an articulatory buffer after planning. Here, numerical predictions about the magnitude of Stroop interference as a function of stimulus onset asynchrony were derived from these accounts. These predictions were then tested on representative data in the literature. Measures of goodness-of-fit showed that the numerical predictions of a response competition account are closer to the empirical data than those of the response exclusion account. These results indicate that response competition provides a better explanation of interference in naming than does response exclusion.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Articulatory buffer; Competition; Response exclusion; Stroop interference

Year:  2020        PMID: 33236285     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-020-01846-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  24 in total

1.  The spatial and temporal signatures of word production components.

Authors:  P Indefrey; W J M Levelt
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2004 May-Jun

Review 2.  On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect.

Authors:  J D Cohen; K Dunbar; J L McClelland
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  The distractor frequency effect in picture-word interference: Evidence for response exclusion.

Authors:  Elisah Dhooge; Robert J Hartsuiker
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  In defense of the lexical-competition account of picture-word interference: a comment on Finkbeiner and Caramazza (2006).

Authors:  Wido La Heij; Jan-Rouke Kuipers; Peter A Starreveld
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 4.027

5.  Now you see it, now you don't: on turning semantic interference into facilitation in a Stroop-like task.

Authors:  Matthew Finkbeiner; Alfonso Caramazza
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.027

6.  The new statistics: why and how.

Authors:  Geoff Cumming
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-11-12

7.  Distractor exclusion is not an early process: a reply to Roelofs, Piai, and Schriefers (2011).

Authors:  Elisah Dhooge; Robert J Hartsuiker
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  The time course of picture-word interference.

Authors:  W R Glaser; F J Düngelhoff
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1984-10       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  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

10.  The magic of words reconsidered: Investigating the automaticity of reading color-neutral words in the Stroop task.

Authors:  Sachiko Kinoshita; Bianca De Wit; Dennis Norris
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 3.051

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.