Distributional analyses reveal the polymorphic nature of the Stroop interference effect: It's about (response) time
- PMID: 38467923
- DOI: 10.3758/s13421-024-01538-3
Distributional analyses reveal the polymorphic nature of the Stroop interference effect: It's about (response) time
Abstract
The study addressed the still-open issue of whether semantic (in addition to response) conflict does indeed contribute to Stroop interference (which along with facilitation contributes to the overall Stroop effect also known as Congruency effect). To this end, semantic conflict was examined across the entire response time (RT) distribution (as opposed to mean RTs). Three (out of four) reported experiments, along with cross-experimental analyses, revealed that semantic conflict was absent in the participants' faster responses. This result characterizes Stroop interference as a unitary phenomenon (i.e., driven uniquely by response conflict). When the same participants' responses were slower, Stroop interference became a composite phenomenon with an additional contribution of semantic conflict that was statistically independent of both response conflict and facilitation. While the present findings allow us to account for the fact that semantic conflict has not been consistently found in past studies, further empirical and theoretical efforts are still needed to explain why exactly it is restricted to longer responses. Indeed, since neither unitary nor composite models can account for this polymorphic nature of Stroop interference on their own, the implications for the current state of theory are outlined.
Keywords: Distributional analyses; Response conflict; Response speed; Semantic conflict; Stroop effect.
© 2024. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.
Similar articles
-
Is There Semantic Conflict in the Stroop Task?Exp Psychol. 2021 Sep;68(5):274-283. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000530. Epub 2021 Dec 15. Exp Psychol. 2021. PMID: 34911356
-
Some further clarifications on age-related differences in Stroop interference.Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Apr;25(2):767-774. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1427-0. Psychon Bull Rev. 2018. PMID: 29372512
-
Some further clarifications on age-related differences in the Stroop task: New evidence from the two-to-one Stroop paradigm.Psychon Bull Rev. 2022 Apr;29(2):492-500. doi: 10.3758/s13423-021-02011-x. Epub 2021 Sep 30. Psychon Bull Rev. 2022. PMID: 34595729
-
The loci of Stroop effects: a critical review of methods and evidence for levels of processing contributing to color-word Stroop effects and the implications for the loci of attentional selection.Psychol Res. 2022 Jun;86(4):1029-1053. doi: 10.1007/s00426-021-01554-x. Epub 2021 Aug 13. Psychol Res. 2022. PMID: 34389901 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Stroop and picture-word interference are two sides of the same coin.Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Dec;16(6):987-99. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.6.987. Psychon Bull Rev. 2009. PMID: 19966248 Review.
Cited by
-
Decomposing delta plots: exploring the time course of the congruency effect using inhibition and facilitation curves.Psychol Res. 2025 Feb 13;89(1):52. doi: 10.1007/s00426-024-02075-z. Psychol Res. 2025. PMID: 39945908 Free PMC article.
-
Stroop task and practice effects demonstrate cognitive dysfunction in long COVID and myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome.Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 5;14(1):26796. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-75651-3. Sci Rep. 2024. PMID: 39500939 Free PMC article.
-
Distinct components of Stroop interference and facilitation: The role of phonology and response modality.Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2025 May;78(5):997-1015. doi: 10.1177/17470218241302490. Epub 2024 Dec 20. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2025. PMID: 39534943 Free PMC article.
-
Do Task Sets Compete in the Stroop Task and Other Selective Attention Paradigms?J Cogn. 2023 May 4;6(1):23. doi: 10.5334/joc.272. eCollection 2023. J Cogn. 2023. PMID: 37152834 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Appelbaum, L. G., Meyerhoff, K. L., & Woldorff, M. G. (2009). Priming and backward influences in the human brain: processing interactions during the Stroop interference Effect. Cerebral Cortex, 19(11), 2508–2521. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhp036 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Augustinova, M., & Ferrand, L. (2014). Automaticity of word reading: Evidence from the semantic Stroop paradigm. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(5), 343–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414540169 - DOI
-
- Augustinova, M., Silvert, L., Ferrand, L., Llorca, P. M., & Flaudias, V. (2015). Behavioral and electrophysiological investigation of semantic and response conflict in the Stroop task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(2), 543–549. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0697-z - DOI
-
- Augustinova, M., Silvert, L., Spatola, N., & Ferrand, L. (2018). Further investigation of distinct components of Stroop interference and of their reduction by short response-stimulus intervals. Acta Psychologica, 189, 54–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACTPSY.2017.03.009 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Augustinova, M., Parris, B. A., & Ferrand, L. (2019). The loci of Stroop interference and facilitation effects with manual and vocal responses. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1786. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01786 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous