The influence of attentional control on stimulus processing is category specific in Stroop tasks

It is still unclear how attentional control influences stimulus processing. We investigated this issue in four Stroop task experiments utilizing a pretest–training–posttest design. Subjects were given extensive training on the Stroop task using typical incongruent Stroop trials. The rates of color naming and word reading, which reflect the efficiency of stimulus processing, were assessed in pretest and posttest. The difference in rates between posttests and pretests reflects the influence of attentional control, acquired during the training phase, on stimulus processing. In Experiment 1, members of color category were used in the training phase; in Experiment 2, members of color category were used, but not in the training phase; in Experiment 3, they were neither in the color category nor were they used in the training. The results consistently showed that the suppression of word reading and the enhancement of color naming were developed in the training phases and they were not due to general training of color-naming task without conflict but to color-naming training with Stroop conflict (Experiment 4). More importantly, both suppression and enhancement affected the members of color category regardless of whether they were trained or not. The present findings suggest that the influence of attentional control on stimulus processing is category specific. We discuss the implications of the present results in terms of existing research on the locus of attentional control in Stroop tasks.

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

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

[3]  Paul M Matthews,et al.  The Role of the Posterior Fusiform Gyrus in Reading , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[4]  S. Petersen,et al.  Hemispheric Specialization in Human Dorsal Frontal Cortex and Medial Temporal Lobe for Verbal and Nonverbal Memory Encoding , 1998, Neuron.

[5]  D. Broadbent.  A mechanical model for human attention and immediate memory. , 1957, Psychological review.

[6]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Interference and Facilitation Effects during Selective Attention: An H2 15O PET Study of Stroop Task Performance , 1995, NeuroImage.

[7]  Carrick C. Williams,et al.  Stroop Interference, Practice, and Aging , 2003, Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition.

[8]  B. Hommel,et al.  Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus–task bindings in task-shift costs , 2003, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Concepts and Categorization , 2003 .

[10]  Michel Hersen,et al.  Comprehensive Handbook of Psychological Assessment: Intellectual and Neuropsychological Assessment , 2003 .

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

[12]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .

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

[14]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Anterior Cingulate Cortex, Conflict Monitoring, and Levels of Processing , 2001, NeuroImage.

[15]  Arthur F. Kramer,et al.  fMRI Studies of Stroop Tasks Reveal Unique Roles of Anterior and Posterior Brain Systems in Attentional Selection , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  A. Treisman.  Strategies and models of selective attention. , 1969, Psychological review.

[17]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Attention Enhances the Neural Processing of Relevant Features and Suppresses the Processing of Irrelevant Features in Humans: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study of the Stroop Task , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[18]  Jan De Houwer,et al.  On the role of stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect , 2003 .

[19]  Colin M. Macleod.  Training on integrated versus separated Stroop tasks: The progression of interference and facilitation , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[20]  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.

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

[22]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Investigations of the functional anatomy of attention using the stroop test , 1993, Neuropsychologia.

[23]  H. Egeth,et al.  Toward a translational model of Stroop interference , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[24]  Marie T. Banich,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Cognitive Control: An Integrative Model of Stroop Task Performance and fMRI Data , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[26]  N. R. Ellis,et al.  Automatic-effortful processing and cognitive inertia in persons with mental retardation. , 1989, American journal of mental retardation : AJMR.

[27]  W. Rogers,et al.  Mechanisms Underlying Reduction in Stroop Interference With Practice for Young and Old Adults , 1994 .

[28]  N. R. Ellis,et al.  Further evidence for cognitive inertia of persons with mental retardation. , 1991, American journal of mental retardation : AJMR.

[29]  J. Driver,et al.  Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance XVIII , 2000 .

[30]  M. Bar,et al.  Top-down facilitation of visual object recognition: object-based and context-based contributions. , 2006, Progress in brain research.

[31]  D. Bub,et al.  Modulation of word-reading processes in task switching. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  C. Brice,et al.  Effects of caffeine, practice, and mode of presentation on stroop task performance , 1996, Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior.

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

[34]  R. Shor,et al.  Effect of practice on a Stroop-like spatial directions task , 1972 .

[35]  W. Notebaert,et al.  Hebbian learning of cognitive control: dealing with specific and nonspecific adaptation. , 2008, Psychological review.

[36]  A. Treisman,et al.  Selective Attention: Perception or Response? , 1967, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[37]  Thad A Polk,et al.  Functional MRI evidence for an abstract, not perceptual, word-form area. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[38]  Antao Chen,et al.  Neural correlates of stimulus and response interference in a 2-1 mapping stroop task. , 2011, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[39]  R. E. Warren,et al.  Stimulus encoding and memory. , 1972 .

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

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

[42]  T. Egner,et al.  Cognitive control mechanisms resolve conflict through cortical amplification of task-relevant information , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.