Literature DB >> 7375318

Effects of motor and verbal practice on the Stroop task.

W T Roe, W E Wilsoncroft, R S Griffiths.   

Abstract

Motor responses to the Stroop task have been largely ignored despite almost a century of active research on verbal responses to the test. The Stroop task maximizes verbal interference by asking subjects to ignore the stimulus word, e.g., red, and respond to the color of the ink in which the work is printed, e.g., blue. A few recent studies have suggested that motor responses (pressing color-coded buttons) might minimize this interference phenomenon presumably via bypassing the usual verbal processing mechanisms. This study compared motor and verbal responses and provided extensive practice. There were no over-all significant differences between motor and verbal responding although motor responses were faster. Significant practice effects and a significant interaction of response mode by practice suggest that motor responding reacts more rapidly to practice effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1980        PMID: 7375318     DOI: 10.1177/003151258005000210

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Mot Skills        ISSN: 0031-5125


  8 in total

1.  Locus of semantic interference in picture-word interference tasks.

Authors:  Markus F Damian; Jeffrey S Bowers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-03

2.  Item-specific congruency effects in nonverbal auditory Stroop.

Authors:  Launa C Leboe; Todd A Mondor
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2006-04-25

3.  The counting Stroop: an interference task specialized for functional neuroimaging--validation study with functional MRI.

Authors:  G Bush; P J Whalen; B R Rosen; M A Jenike; S C McInerney; S L Rauch
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 4.  Practice-related optimization and transfer of executive functions: a general review and a specific realization of their mechanisms in dual tasks.

Authors:  Tilo Strobach; Tiina Salminen; Julia Karbach; Torsten Schubert
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-03-26

5.  Selective attention to Stroop dimensions: effects of baseline discriminability, response mode, and practice.

Authors:  R D Melara; J R Mounts
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1993-09

6.  Comparing Stroop-like and Simon Effects on Perceptual Features.

Authors:  Elisa Scerrati; Luisa Lugli; Roberto Nicoletti; Carlo Umiltà
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Is handwriting constrained by phonology? Evidence from Stroop tasks with written responses and Chinese characters.

Authors:  Markus F Damian; Qingqing Qu
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-10-17

8.  A closer look at cognitive control: differences in resource allocation during updating, inhibition and switching as revealed by pupillometry.

Authors:  Eefje W M Rondeel; Henk van Steenbergen; Rob W Holland; Ad van Knippenberg
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 3.169

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.