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 and Performance

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 3-19

  Zhang, Huazhong ^a   Kornblum, Sylvan ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY KOKOMO   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONDITIONING; HUMAN; MALE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; REACTION TIME;

CONDITIONING (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME;

EID: 0031990822     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.24.1.3     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. 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.
2. Cohen, J. D., Servan-Schreiber, D., & McClelland, J. L. (1992). A parallel distributed processing approach to automaticity. American Journal of Psychology, 105, 239-269.
3. Coles, M. G. H., Gratton, G., Bashore, T. R., Eriksen, C. W., & Donchin, E. (1985). A psychophysiological investigation of the continuous flow model of human information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 529-553.
4. Damasio, A. R., & Damasio, H. (1992). Brain and language. Scientific American, 267, 88-95.
5. Dyer, F. N. (1971). The duration of word meaning responses: Stroop interference for different preexposures of the word. Psychonomic Science, 25, 229-231.
6. Dyer, F. N. (1973). The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the study of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes. Memory & Cognition, 1, 106-120.
7. Dyer, F. N. (1974). Stroop interference with long preexposures of the word: Comparison of pure and mixed preexposure sequences. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 3, 8-10.
8. Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143-149.
9. Eriksen, C. W., & Eriksen, B. A. (1979). Target redundancy in visual search: Do repetitions of the target within the display impair processing? Perception & Psychophysics, 26, 195-205.
10. Fitts, P. M., & Deininger, R. L. (1954). S-R compatibility: Correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 483-492.
11. Glaser, M. O., & Glaser, W. R. (1982). Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 875-894.
12. Glaser, W. R., & Glaser, M. O. (1989). Context effects in Stroop-like word and picture processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 13-42.
13. Gratton, G., Coles, M. H., Sirevaag, E. J., Eriksen, C. W., & Donchin, E. (1988). Pre- and poststimulus activation of response channels: A psychophysiological analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 331-344.
14. Green, E. J., & Barber, P. J. (1981). An auditory Stroop effect with judgments of speaker gender. Perception & Psychophysics, 30, 459-466.
15. Hedge, A., & Marsh, N. W. A. (1975). The effects of irrelevant spatial correspondence on two-choice response time. Acta Psychologica, 39, 427-439.
16. Hintzman, D. L., Carre, F. A., Eskridge, V. L., Owens, A. M., Shaff, S. S., & Sparks, M. E. (1972). "Stroop" effect: Input or output phenomenon? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 95, 458-459.
17. Hock, H. S., & Egeth, H. (1970). Verbal interference with encoding in a perceptual classification task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83, 299-303.
18. Ishihara, S. (1991). Ishihara's tests for colour-blindness (concise ed.). Tokyo: Kanehara.
19. Kahneman, D., & Chajczyk, D. (1983). Tests of the automaticity of reading: Dilution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 497-509.
20. Kornblum, S. (1992). Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 743-777). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
21. Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop and Simon-like stimuli. Psychological Research, 56, 130-135.
22. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
23. Kornblum, S., & Lee, J. W. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 855-875.
24. Logan, G. D. (1978). Attention in character-classification tasks: Evidence for the automaticity of component stages. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 32-63.
25. Lu, C. H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174-207.
26. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.
27. MacLeod, C. M., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Training and Stroop-like interference: Evidence for a continuum of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 126-135.
28. McClelland, J. L., & Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
29. Miller, J. (1991). The flanker compatibility effect as a function of visual angle, attentional focus, visual transients, and perceptual load: A search for boundary conditions. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 270-288.
30. Phaf, R. H., van der Heijden, A. H. C., & Hudson, P. T. W. (1990). SLAM: A connectionist model for attention in visual selection tasks. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 273-341.
31. Posner, M. I., & Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 55-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Seymour, P. H. K. (1977). Conceptual encoding and locus of the Stroop effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 245-265.
33. Shaffer, W. O., & LaBerge, D. (1979). Automatic semantic processing of unattended words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 413-426.
34. Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190.
35. Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 163-180). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
36. Simon, J. R., & Berbaum, K. (1990). Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: The "Stroop effect" vs. the "Simon effect." Acta Psychologica, 73, 159-170.
37. Simon, J. R., & Sudalaimuthu, P. (1979). Effects of S-R mapping and response modality on performance in a Stroop task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 176-187.
38. Stoffels, E. J., & van der Molen, M. W. (1988). Effects of visual and auditory noise on visual choice reaction time in a continuous-flow paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 7-14.
39. Stoffels, E. J., van der Molen, M. W., & Keuss, P. J. (1989). An additive factors analysis of the effect(s) of location cues associated with auditory stimuli on stages of information processing. Acta Psychologica, 70, 161-197.
40. Stroop, J. R. (1992). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 15-23. (Original work published 1935)
41. Washburn, D. A. (1994). Stroop-like effects for monkeys and humans: Processing speed or strength of association? Psychological Science, 5, 375-379.
42. Zhang, H., Kornblum, S., & Zhang, J. (1995). Utilization of stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility principles in machine designs. In K. Cox, J. Marsh, & B. Anderson (Eds.), First international cognitive technology conference (pp. 151-157). Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.
43. Zhang, H., Zhang, J., & Kornblum, S. (1997). A parallel distributed processing model of stimulus-stimulus and stimulus-response compatibility. Manuscript submitted for publication.