The effects of stimulus-response mapping and irrelevant stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus overlap in four-choice Stroop tasks with single-carrier stimuli.

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether and how stimulus-stimulus (SS) and stimulus-response (SR) consistency and SR congruence effects combine to produce the Stroop effect. Two experiments were conducted with 4-choice tasks in which SS and SR consistency and SR congruence effects were examined in isolation as well as in the Stroop task. The experiments were so designed as to remove the confound between SS and SR consistency that is ordinarily found in standard Stroop tasks and to pit SS consistency against the logical recording hypothesis (A. Hedge & N. W. A. Marsh, 1975). The results indicate that SS and SR consistency both contribute to the Stroop effect and that they interact. This finding supports models such as the dimensional overlap model (e.g., S. Kornblum & J. W. Lee, 1995) that distinguish between SS and SR overlap. Simulation results from an interactive activation network, modeled after the dimensional overlap model, provide reasonable fits to the experimental data.

[1]  P H Seymour,et al.  Conceptual Encoding and Locus of the Stroop Effect , 1977, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  Robert W. Proctor,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective , 1990 .

[3]  S. Kornblum,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  D L Hintzman,et al.  "Stroop" effect: input or output phenomenon? , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[5]  R. H. Phaf,et al.  SLAM: A connectionist model for attention in visual selection tasks , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[6]  J. Stroop.  Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. , 1992 .

[7]  G. Logan.  Attention in character-classification tasks: Evidence for the automaticity of component stages. , 1978 .

[8]  J R Simon,et al.  Effects of S-R mapping and response modality on performance in a Stroop Task. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  S. Kornblum,et al.  A Parallel Distributed Processing Model of Stimulus–Stimulus and Stimulus–Response Compatibility , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[10]  石原 忍.  Ishihara's tests for colour-blindness , 1966 .

[11]  Gordon D. Logan,et al.  Attention in Character-Classification Tasks : Evidence for the Automaticity of Component Stages , 1978 .

[12]  Colin M. Macleod,et al.  Training and Stroop-like interference: evidence for a continuum of automaticity. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  Charles W. Eriksen,et al.  Target redundancy in visual search: Do repetitions of the target within thedisplay impair processing? , 1979 .

[14]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 2004 .

[15]  R. L. Deininger,et al.  S-R compatibility: correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[16]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[17]  James L. McClelland,et al.  On the control of automatic processes: a parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. , 1990, Psychological review.

[18]  David LaBerge,et al.  Automatic Semantic Processing of Unattended Words. , 1979 .

[19]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A parallel distributed processing approach to automaticity. , 1992, The American journal of psychology.

[20]  A. Hedge,et al.  The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response-time. , 1975, Acta psychologica.

[21]  M. W. van der Molen,et al.  An additive factors analysis of the effect(s) of location cues associated with auditory stimuli on stages of information processing. , 1989, Acta psychologica.

[22]  Alan S. Brown,et al.  Information Processing and Cognition: The Loyola Symposium , 1976 .

[23]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[24]  Frederick N. Dyer,et al.  The duration of word meaning responses: Stroop interference for different preexposures of the word , 1971 .

[25]  D A Washburn,et al.  Stroop-Like Effects for Monkeys and Humans: Processing Speed or Strength of Association? , 1994, Psychological science.

[26]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Tests of the automaticity of reading: dilution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  H Egeth,et al.  Verbal interference with encoding in a perceptual classification task. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.

[28]  S Kornblum,et al.  The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop- and Simon-like stimuli , 1994, Psychological research.

[29]  P. Barber,et al.  An auditory Stroop effect with judgments of speaker gender , 1981, Perception & psychophysics.

[30]  F. Dyer.  Stroop interference with long preexposures of the word: Comparison of pure and mixed preexposure sequences , 1974 .

[31]  J R Simon,et al.  Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: the 'Stroop effect' vs. the 'Simon effect'. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[32]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Pre- and poststimulus activation of response channels: a psychophysiological analysis. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  Jeff F. Miller.  The flanker compatibility effect as a function of visual angle, attentional focus, visual transients, and perceptual load: A search for boundary conditions , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[34]  J. R. Simon.  The Effects of an Irrelevant Directional CUE on Human Information Processing , 1990 .

[35]  Shinobu Ishihara.  Ishihara's test for colour-blindness , 1932 .

[36]  A. Osman,et al.  Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. , 1990, Psychological review.

[37]  G. Stelmach,et al.  Tutorials in Motor Behavior , 1980 .

[38]  S. Kornblum.  Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility. , 1992 .

[39]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and cognitive control. , 1975 .

[40]  E. J. Stoffels,et al.  Effects of visual and auditory noise on visual choice reaction time in a continuous-flow paradigm , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  R. Proctor,et al.  The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[42]  Harry A. Whitaker,et al.  Brain and Language , 1994 .

[43]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

[44]  Colin M. Macleod.  Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[45]  F N Dyer,et al.  The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the stlldy of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes , 1973, Memory & cognition.

[46]  W. Glaser,et al.  Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[47]  W. Glaser,et al.  Context effects in stroop-like word and picture processing. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.