Literature DB >> 9796234

Differential components of the manual and vocal Stroop tasks.

D Sharma1, F P McKenna.   

Abstract

In this study, four components of the Stroop effect were examined for manual word and vocal responses. The components were lexical, semantic relatedness, semantic relevance, and response set membership. The results showed that all four components were present in the vocal response task. However, in the manual word response task, the only component that produced significant interference on its own was response set membership. These results do not support predictions made by recent translation models (see W. R. Glaser & M. O. Glaser [1989] and Sugg & McDonald [1994]). A possible solution was suggested that located two sites for Stroop interference. The lexical, semantic relatedness, and semantic relevance effects were located in the lexical system, whereas the response set membership effect was located at a response selection stage.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9796234     DOI: 10.3758/bf03201181

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  18 in total

1.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.

Authors:  G R Loftus; M E Masson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1994-12

Review 2.  Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy.

Authors:  S Kornblum; T Hasbroucq; A Osman
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Components of Stroop-like interference in picture naming.

Authors:  W La Heij
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1988-09

Review 4.  The Stroop color-word test: a review.

Authors:  A R Jensen; W D Rohwer
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  1966

5.  Verbal interference with encoding in a perceptual classification task.

Authors:  H S Hock; H Egeth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1970-02

6.  An iinvestigation into some of the underlying associative verbal processes of the Stroop colour effect.

Authors:  D Pritchatt
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol       Date:  1968-11       Impact factor: 2.143

7.  Mechanisms underlying reduction in Stroop interference with practice for young and old adults.

Authors:  C L Dulaney; W A Rogers
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Time course of inhibition in color-response and word-response versions of the Stroop task.

Authors:  M J Sugg; J E McDonald
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Effects of response type and set size on Stroop color-word performance.

Authors:  L McClain
Journal:  Percept Mot Skills       Date:  1983-06

10.  Toward a translational model of Stroop interference.

Authors:  R A Virzi; H E Egeth
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1985-07
View more
  28 in total

Review 1.  On a variant of Stroop's paradigm: which cognitions press your buttons?

Authors:  M Brown; D Besner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-09

2.  The myth of ballistic processing: evidence from Stroop's paradigm.

Authors:  D Besner
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-06

3.  Single letter coloring and spatial cuing eliminates a semantic contribution to the Stroop effect.

Authors:  Laurie A Manwell; Martha Anne Roberts; Derek Besner
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-06

4.  Suggestion does not de-automatize word reading: evidence from the semantically based Stroop task.

Authors:  Maria Augustinova; Ludovic Ferrand
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-06

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

Authors:  Henrik Saalbach; Elsbeth Stern
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-08

6.  Basic processes in reading: is visual word recognition obligatory?

Authors:  Evan F Risko; Jennifer A Stolz; Derek Besner
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-02

7.  Filling a gap in the semantic gradient: color associates and response set effects in the Stroop task.

Authors:  Evan F Risko; James R Schmidt; Derek Besner
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-04

8.  Does response modality influence conflict? Modelling vocal and manual response Stroop interference.

Authors:  Alex Fennell; Roger Ratcliff
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  Focusing on task conflict in the Stroop effect.

Authors:  Olga Entel; Joseph Tzelgov
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-12-03

10.  The reliability paradox: Why robust cognitive tasks do not produce reliable individual differences.

Authors:  Craig Hedge; Georgina Powell; Petroc Sumner
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2018-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.