Recent researches have suggested the attentional factors or processes, such as Stimulus Onset Asynchrony (SOA), inhibition of return (IOR)， and the spatial structure of stimuli, may affect the Stroop interfere effect, indicating the semantic interfere of the color word was conditional automatic. However, it was still unknown whether the factors above had interaction and whether their interaction impacted the Stroop interfere effect. Additionally, recent research doubted about the translation account (Virzi, 1985) in explaining the mechanism of the Stroop interfere effect. So it was necessary to give an inspection to this theory in a new paradigm.
Thus, this study was designed according to cue-target paradigm and gave a further exploration to the mechanism of the classic Stroop interfere effect which is affected by the exogenous attentional cues above. In this study, SOA, the cue’s color and its spatial structure were operated to elicit different attentional processes. Forty two college students jointed the experiment and completed the color naming task. And the repeated-measure ANOVA showed the relationship between Stroop interfere effect and the attentional factors mentioned above.
The result reveals that: (1) the IOR effect is not found in this experiment, and there is no interaction between SOA, the validity of the cue and the color of the cue. (2) The cue’s validity affect the Stroop interfere effect. If the cue is valid, the reaction time (RT) of the color naming task become shorter and the Stroop interfere effect come out; While if the cue is invalid, the RT become longer and the Stroop interfere effect disappear. (3) The color of the cue impact the Stroop interfere effect. If the color of the cue is consistence with the color of the color word, the Stroop interfere effect disappear; but if the color of the cue is consistence with the color of the color word, the Stroop interfere effect come out.
The results indicates the Stroop interfere effect which emerges in this study is impacted by the cue’s color and its validity and the attentional processes which are induced by those two factors might be parallel. Additionally, this Stroop interfere effect is also in obedience to translation account.
Keywords: Stroop interfere effect; cue-target paradigm; translation account theory
Key words
Stroop interfere effect /
cue-target paradigm /
translation account theory
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
陈俊, 刘海燕, 张积家. (2002). Stroop效应研究的新进展——理论、范式及影响因素. 心理科学,30(2), 415–418
付佳, 张明. (2009). 返回抑制对空间Stroop效应的影响. 心理与行为研究，7(4), 265–268
刘海燕, 陈俊, 肖少北. Stroop 效应的研究进展. 海南师范大学学报(自然科学版),22(1), 100–103
曲折, 刘淑华, 宋艳, 丁玉珑. (2006). SOA对Stroop启动效应的影响:行为和ERP研究. 心理科学. 29(4), 833–837
张明,陈骐,金志成.(2003).注意网络的关系——返回抑制和Stroop干扰效应. 心理科学，26(4), 638–641
Blais, C. & Besner, D. (2007). A reverse Stroop effect without translation or reading difficulty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(3), 466 – 469.
Cho, Y. S., Lien, M. C., & Proctor, R. W. (2006). Stroop dilution depends on the nature of the color carrier but not on its location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 826 – 839.
Choi, J. M., Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2009). Ippaired color word processing at an unattended location: evidence from a Stroop task combine with inhibition of return. Memory & Cognition, 37(6), 935 – 944.
Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). Automaticity, Attention and the Strength of Processing:A Parallel Distributed Processing Account of the Stroop Effect. Psychological Review, 97, 332 – 361.
Durgin, F. H. (2000). The reverse Stroop effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7,121 – 125.
Funes, M. J., Lupiá?ez, J., & Milliken, B. (2007). Separate mechanisms recruited by exogenous and endogenous spatial cues: evidence from a spatial Stroop paradigm. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance, 33(2), 348 – 362.
Funes, M. J., Lupiá?ez, J., & Milliken, B. (2008). The Modulation of Exogenous Spatial Cueing on Spatial Stroop Interference: Evidence of a set for "Cue–target event segergation". Psicológica, 29(1), 65 – 95.
Kim, H., Cho, Y. S., Yamaguchi, M., & Proctor, R. W. (2008). Influence of color word availability on the Stroop color–naming effect. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 1540 – 1551.
Lupiá?ez, J., & Funes, M. J. (2005). Peripheral apatial cues modulate spatial Stroop interference: analyzing the "locus" of the cueing modulation. European Journal of Experiment psychology(17), 727 – 752.
Virzi, R. A., & Egeth, H. E. (1985). Toward a translational model of Stroop interference. Memory & Cognition, 13, 304 – 319.
Vivas, A. B., & Fuentes, L. J. (2001). Stroop interference is affected in inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 8, 315 – 323.
Waszak, F. (2003). Object–based attentional selection can modulate the Stroop effect. Memory & Cognition, 31, 983 –994.
Wühr, P., & Waszak, F. (2003). Object-based attentional selection can modulate the Stroop Effect. Memory & Cognition, 31(6), 983-994.
Xu, L., & Xu, B. (2007). A Review of the Research and Theories about Stroop Dilution Effect. Psychological Science, 30(5), 1269 – 1271.
PDF(534 KB)
