Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11277451

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

J S Monahan
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Automaticity theory and the effect of coloring a single element were tested with all or only 1 element colored in Stroop tasks. The 312 participants in 5 experiments indicated stimulus presentation color by key press. Experiments 1 and 2 replicated those of D. Besner, J. A. Stoltz, and C. Boutilier (1997) with some changes, and revealed similar results: less Stroop interference with only 1 letter colored. Besner et al. (1997) interpreted the results as indicating that coloring a single letter eliminates automatic reading processes. The cause of that reduction in Stroop interference was investigated in Experiments 3, 4, and 5 using color words, bars, and rectangles. The effect of coloring 1 element was to increase color-naming time by the same amount for congruent and neutral, nonverbal stimuli, but not for incongruent stimuli. The results are interpreted in terms of automaticity theory, and a continuous flow approach to the Stroop effect is presented.

Explore related subjects

AttentionColor PerceptionHumansReaction TimeReadingClinical TrialJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled Trial

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J S Monahan. 2001. Coloring single stroop elements: reducing automaticity or slowing color processing?. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221300109598901

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2002

Deficits in language-mediated mental operations in patients with schizophrenia.

We found previously that a subgroup of schizophrenic patients who passed screening tests of attentional competence showed memory deficits on word memory tasks, but were comparable with controls on tone memory tasks. To better understand the nature of language-specific memory deficits in this subgroup of patients, the present experiment was designed to bypass early perceptual processing of verbal material and determine if patients continue to show impaired performance on verbal memory tasks. Patients who passed the screening tests ('discriminator' patients; DSz) received four serial position tasks. In two, familiar sounds or line drawings were presented and subjects were required to remember the word associated with each stimulus item. In the other two, subjects received hard-to-label auditory and visual stimuli (birdsongs or snowflakes).DSz patients showed large memory deficits compared with controls when required to remember words associated with the familiar sounds or drawings, providing clear evidence of deficits in verbal memory processes independent of sensory processing of verbal stimuli. The interaction between diagnosis and labeling was highly significant, confirming that these patients have particular difficulty with verbal as opposed to non-verbal memory. This was particularly striking on the auditory tests where two patients out-performed all controls on the birdsong test, but were below all controls on the easy-to-label sounds test. The verbal memory tests were easier than the non-verbal memory tests for controls, thus deconfounding task difficulty and deficit specificity.

Attention↗
PubMed2002

Hypnosis and neuroscience: a cross talk between clinical and cognitive research.

Despite its long use in clinical settings, the checkered reputation of hypnosis has dimmed its promise as a research instrument. Whereas cognitive neuroscience has scantily fostered hypnosis as a manipulation, neuroimaging techniques offer new opportunities to use hypnosis and posthypnotic suggestion as probes into brain mechanisms and, reciprocally, provide a means of studying hypnosis itself. We outline how the hypnotic state can serve as a way to tap neurocognitive questions and how cognitive assays can in turn shed new light on the neural bases of hypnosis. This cross talk should enhance research and clinical applications.

Attention↗
PubMed2002

Attending to objects: costs or benefits?

The single-object advantage is said to occur when performance is faster and/or more accurate when the two targets to be compared appear on one object than when they appear on two different objects. The single-object advantage has been interpreted to suggest that attention can select objects rather than unparsed regions of visual space. In five experiments we explored whether directing attention to one object rather than two objects produces a benefit or a minor cost. Participants were required to compare two target features that belonged to one object, to two objects, or did not belong to any object. In addition, we varied the relevance to the task of object-related global information, such as symmetry of the object and perceptual cluttering of the background. Results showed that attending to one object in comparison to attending to no object produced a benefit only when object-related global information was relevant to the task. In contrast, when object-related global information was irrelevant to the task, attending to one object produced a cost. Thus, it can be concluded that attending to an object does not produce an absolute benefit, but rather produces a smaller cost than attending to two objects.

Attention↗