Advertisement

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 310–315 | Cite as

Filling a gap in the semantic gradient: Color associates and response set effects in the Stroop task

  • Evan F. Risko
  • James R. Schmidt
  • Derek Besner
Brief Reports

Abstract

In the Stroop task, incongruent color associates (e.g., LAKE) interfere more with color identification than neutral words do (e.g., SEAT). However, color associates have historically been related to colors in the response set. Response set membership is an important factor in Stroop interference, because color words in the response set interfere more than color words not in the response set. It has not been established whether response set membership plays a role in the ability of a colorassociate to interfere with color identification. This issue was addressed in two experiments (one using vocal responses and one using manual responses) by comparing the magnitude of interference caused by color associates related to colors in the response set with that of interference caused by color associates unrelated to colors in the response set. The results of both experiments show that color associates unrelated to colors in the response set interfered with color identification more than neutral words did. However, the amount of interference was less than that from color associates that were related to colors in the response set. In addition, this pattern was consistent across response modalities. These results are discussed with respect to various theoretical accounts of Stroop interference.

Keywords

Manual Response Stroop Task Color Word Neutral Word Stroop Effect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blais, C., & Besner, D. (in press). Reverse Stroop effect with untranslated responses.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, M., &Besner, D. (2001). On a variant of Stroop’s paradigm: Which cognitions press your buttons?Memory & Cognition,29, 903–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., &McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect.Psychological Review,97, 332–361.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. De Houwer, J. (2003). On the role of stimulus—response and stimulus—stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect.Memory & Cognition,31, 353–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Durgin, F. H. (2003). Translation and competition among internal representations in a reverse Stroop effect.Perception & Psychophysics,65, 367–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fox, L. A., Shor, R. E., &Steinman, R. J. (1971). Semantic gradients and interference in naming color, spatial direction, and numerosity.Journal of Experimental Psychology,91, 59–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Glaser, W. R., &Glaser, M. O. (1989). Context effect in Stroop-like word and picture processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,118, 13–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Klein, G. S. (1964). Semantic power measured through the interference of words with color-naming.American Journal of Psychology,77, 576–588.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Klopfer, D. S. (1996). Stroop interference and color-word similarity.Psychological Science,7, 150–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin,109, 163–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Proctor, R. W. (1978). Sources of color-word interference in the Stroop color-naming task.Perception & Psychophysics,23, 413–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Psychology Software Tools (2002). E-Prime [Computer software]. Pittsburgh, PA: Author.Google Scholar
  13. Roelofs, A. (2003). Goal-referenced selection of verbal action: Modeling attentional control in the Stroop task.Psychological Review,110, 88–125.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Scheibe, K., Shaver, P. R., &Carrier, S. C. (1967). Color association values and response interference on variants of the Stroop test.Acta Psychologica,26, 286–295.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schmidt, J. R., &Cheesman, J. (2005). Dissociating stimulus—stimulus and response-response effects in the Stroop task.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,59, 132–138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Seymour, P. H. (1977). Conceptual encoding and locus of the Stroop effect.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,29, 245–265.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sharma, D., &McKenna, F. P. (1998). Differential components of the manual and vocal Stroop tasks.Memory & Cognition,26, 1033–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology,18, 643–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sugg, M. J., &McDonald, J. E. (1994). Time course of inhibition in color-response and word-response versions of the Stroop task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 647–675.Google Scholar
  20. Van Selst, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier estimation.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,47A, 631–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhang, H., &Kornblum, S. (1998). The effects of stimulus-response mapping and irrelevant stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus overlap in four-choice Stroop tasks with single-carrier stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 3–19.Google Scholar
  22. Zhang, H., Zhang, J., &Kornblum, S. (1999). A parallel distributed processing model of stimulus—stimulus and stimulus—response compatibility.Cognitive Psychology,38, 386–432.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Evan F. Risko
    • 2
  • James R. Schmidt
    • 1
  • Derek Besner
    • 2
  1. 1.University of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Psychology DepartmentUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations