Interactions between color and word processing in a flanker task

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 198-209

  Henik, Avishai ^c   Merrill, David ^a   Ro, Tony ^b,d   Rafal, Robert ^b,d   Safadi, Ziad ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

ADULT; ATTENTION; COLOR PERCEPTION; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; VERBAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 0033073452     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.25.1.198     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Brown, T. L., Roos-Gilbert, L., & Carr, T. H. (1995). Automaticity and word perception: Evidence from Stroop and Stroop dilution effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1395-1411.
2. Cohen, A. (1994, November). The Stroop effect: Much less robust than it seems. Paper presented at the 35th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, MO.
3. 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.
4. Eriksen, C. W., & Eriksen, B. A. (1979). Target redundancy in visual search: Do repetitions of the target within the display impair processing? Percept ion & Psychophysics, 26, 195-205.
5. Eriksen, C. W., & Schultz, D. W. (1979). Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 249-263.
6. Gatti, S. V., & Egeth, H. E. (1978). Failure of spatial selectivity in Vision. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 11, 181-184.
7. Hagenaar, R., & van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1986). Target-noise separation in visual selective attention. Acta Psychologica, 62, 161-176.
8. Kahneman, D., & Henik, A. (1981). Perceptual organization and attention. In M. Kubovy & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), Perceptual organization (pp. 181-211). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Kornblum, S. (1992). Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response compatibility. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior II (pp. 743-777). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
10. 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/Psychologische Forschung, 56, 130-135.
11. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility: A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
12. 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.
13. La Heij, W., Helaha, D., & van den Hof, E. (1993). Why does blue hamper the naming of red? Acta Psychologica, 83, 159-177.
14. Logan, G. D. (1980). Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: Theory and data. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 523-553.
15. Logan, G. D. (1985). Skill and automaticity: Relations, implications, and future directions. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 39, 367-386.
16. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.
17. 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.
18. Merikle, P. M., & Gorewich, N. J. (1979). Spatial selectivity in vision: Field size depends upon noise size. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 14, 343-346.
19. 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.
20. Posner, M. I., & Henik, A. (1983). Isolating representational systems. In J. Beck & A. Rosenfeld (Eds.), Human and machine vision (pp. 395-412), New York: Academic Press.
21. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662.
22. 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 and Performance, 20, 647-675.
23. Treisman, A. M. (1969). Strategies and models of selective attention. Psychological Review, 76, 282-299.
24. Treisman, A., & Feamley, S. (1969). The Stroop test: Selective attention to colours and words. Nature, 222, 437-439.
25. Treisman, A., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
26. Treisman, A., & Schmidt, N. (1982). Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 107-141.
27. Tzelgov, J., Henik, A., & Berger, J. (1992). Controlling Stroop effects by manipulating expectations for color words. Memory & Cognition, 20, 727-735.
28. Tzelgov, J., Henik, A., & Leiser, D. (1990). Controlling Stroop interference: Evidence from a bilingual task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 760-771.
29. Virzi, R. A., & Egeth, H. E. (1985). Toward a translational model of Stroop interference. Memory & Cognition, 13, 304-319.