Stroop and picture-word interference are two sides of the same coin

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 16, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 987-999

  van Maanen, Leendert ^a   van Rijn, Hedderik ^a   Borst, Jelmer P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CONFLICT; HUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; STROOP TEST;

ATTENTION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; STROOP TEST;

EID: 74849111858     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.16.6.987     Document Type: Article

References (74)

1. Altmann, E. M., & Davidson, D. J. (2001). An integrative approach to Stroop: Combining a language model and a unified cognitive theory. In J. D. Moore & K. Stenning (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Anderson, J. R. (2007). How can the human mind occur in the physical universe? New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Lebiere, C., & Matessa, M. (1998). An integrated theory of list memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 341-380.
4. Anderson, J. R., & Milson, R. (1989). Human memory: An adaptive perspective. Psychological Review, 96, 703-719.
5. Anderson, J. R., & Schooler, L.J. (1991). Reflections of the environment in memory. Psychological Science, 2, 396-408.
6. Byrne, M. D., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Serial modules in parallel: The psychological refractory period and perfect time-sharing. Psychological Review, 108, 847-869.
7. 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.
8. Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407-428.
9. De Houwer, J. (2003). On the role of stimulus-response and stimulus- stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect. Memory & Cognition, 31, 353-359.
10. Dell'Acqua, R., Job, R., Peressotti, F., & Pascali, A. (2007). The picture-word interference effect is not a Stroop effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 717-722.
11. Dell'Acqua, R., Lotto, L., & Job, R. (2000). Naming times and standardized norms for the Italian PD/DPSS set of 266 pictures: Direct comparisons with American, English, French, and Spanish published databases. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 588-615.
12. Denckla, M. B., & Rudel, R. G. (1976). Rapid automatized naming (RAN): Dyslexia differentiated from other learning disabilities. Neuro psychologia, 14, 471-479.
13. Donders, F. C. (1969). On the speed of mental processes. Acta Psychologica, 30, 412-431. (Original work published 1868)
14. Dyer, F. N. (1973). The Stroop phenomenon and its use in study of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes. Memory & Cognition, 1, 106-120.
15. Fagot, C., & Pashler, H. (1992). Making two responses to a single object: Implications for the central attentional bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 1058-1079.
16. Ferreira, V. S., & Pashler, H. (2002). Central bottleneck influences on the processing stages of word production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 28, 1187-1199.
17. Glaser, M. O., & Glaser, W. R. (1982). Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 8, 875-894.
18. Glaser, W. R., & Düngelhoff, F.-J. (1984). The time course of picture-word interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 640-654.
19. Glaser, W. R., & Glaser, M. O. (1989). Context effects in Stroop-like word and picture processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 13-42.
20. Gray, W. D. (2007a). Composition and control of integrated cognitive systems. In W. D. Gray (Ed.), Integrated models of cognitive systems (pp. 3-12). New York: Oxford University Press.
21. Gray, W. D. (Ed.) (2007b). Integrated models of cognitive systems. New York: Oxford University Press.
22. Greenwald, A. G., & Shulman, H. G. (1973). On doing two things at once: II. Elimination of psychological refractory period. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101, 70-76.
23. Hazeltine, E., Teague, D., & Ivry, R. B. (2002). Simultaneous dualtask performance reveals parallel response selection after practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 527-545.
24. Hendriks, P., van Rijn, H., & Valkenier, B. (2007). Learning to reason about speakers' alternatives in sentence comprehension: A computational account. Lingua, 117, 1079-1096.
25. Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2001). Computational modeling of visual attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2, 194-203.
26. Janssen, N., Schirm, W., Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2008). Semantic interference in a delayed naming task: Evidence for the response exclusion hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 34, 249-256.
27. Jolicœur, P., & Dell'Acqua, R. (1998). The demonstration of shortterm consolidation. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 138-202.
28. Juvina, I., & Taatgen, N. A. (2009). A repetition-suppression account of between-trial effects in the Stroop task. Acta Psychologica, 131, 72-84.
29. Klein, G. S. (1964). Semantic power measured through the interference of words with color-naming. American Journal of Psychology, 77, 576-588.
30. Kuipers, J. R., La Heij, W., & Costa, A. (2006). A further look at semantic context effects in language production: The role of response congruency. Language & Cognitive Processes, 21, 892-919.
31. Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 22, 1-75.
32. Levy, J., & Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 862-869.
33. Lovett, M. C. (2005). A strategy-based interpretation of Stroop. Cognitive Science, 29, 493-524.
34. Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. New York: Oxford University Press.
35. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.
36. MacLeod, C. M., & MacDonald, P. A. (2000). Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: Uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 383-391.
37. Marcel, A. J. (1983). Conscious and unconscious perception: Experiments on visual masking and word recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 197-237.
38. McCann, R. S., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 471-484.
39. McClelland, J. L. (1979). On the time relations of mental processes: Examination of systems of processes in cascade. Psychological Review, 86, 287-330.
40. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997a). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: I. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104, 3-65.
41. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997b). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: II. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. Psychological Review, 104, 749-791.
42. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
43. Risko, E. F., Schmidt, J. R., & Besner, D. (2006). Filling a gap in the semantic gradient: Color associates and response set effects in the Stroop task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 310-315.
44. Roelofs, A. (1992). A spreading-activation theory of lemma retrieval in speaking. Cognition, 42, 107-142.
45. Roelofs, A. (2003). Goal-referenced selection of verbal action: Modeling attentional control in the Stroop task. Psychological Review, 110, 88-125.
46. Rossion, B., & Pourtois, G. (2004). Revisiting Snodgrass and Vanderwart's object pictorial set: The role of surface detail in basic-level object recognition. Perception, 33, 217-236.
47. Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H. E., & Klaassen, A. (2001). Processing bottlenecks in dual-task performance: Structural limitation or strategic postponement? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 73-80.
48. Salvucci, D. D., & Taatgen, N. A. (2008). Threaded cognition: An integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. Psychological Review, 115, 101-130.
49. Schmidt, J. R., & Cheesman, J. (2005). Dissociating stimulus-stimulus and response-response effects in the Stroop task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Experimentale, 59, 132-138.
50. Schumacher, E. H., Lauber, E. J., Glass, J. M., Zurbriggen, E. I., Gmeindl, L., Kieras, D. E., & Meyer, D. E. (1999). Concurrent response-selection processes in dual-task performance: Evidence for adaptive executive control of task scheduling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 791-814.
51. Schumacher, E. H., Seymour, T. L., Glass, J. M., Fencsik, D. E., Lauber, E. J., Kieras, D. E., & Meyer, D. E. (2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychological Science, 12, 101-108.
52. Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276-315.
53. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662.
54. Taatgen, N. A., & Anderson, J. R. (2002). Why do children learn to say "Broke"? A model of learning the past tense without feedback. Cognition, 86, 123-155.
55. Taatgen, N. A., & Anderson, J. R. (2008). Constraints in cognitive architectures. In R. Sun (Ed.), Handbook of computational psychology (pp. 170-185) New York: Cambridge University Press.
56. Taatgen, N. A., Juvina, I., Schipper, M., Borst, J. P., & Martens, S. (2009). Too much control can hurt: A threaded cognition model of the attentional blink. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 1-29.
57. Taatgen, N. A., van Rijn, H., & Anderson, J. R. (2007). An integrated theory of prospective time interval estimation: The role of cognition, attention, and learning. Psychological Review, 114, 577-598.
58. Telford, C. W. (1931). The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1-36.
59. Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
60. van Maanen, L. (2009). Context effects on memory retrieval: Theory and applications. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, Groningen.
61. van Maanen, L., & van Rijn, H. (2007a). Accounting for subliminal priming in ACT-R. In R. L. Lewis, T. A. Polk, & J. E. Laird (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (pp. 1-6). New York: Psychology Press.
62. van Maanen, L., & van Rijn, H. (2007b). An accumulator model of semantic interference. Cognitive Systems Research, 8, 174-181.
63. van Maanen, L., & van Rijn, H. (2008). The picture-word interference effect is a Stroop effect after all. In V. Sloutsky, B. Love, & K. McRae (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 645-650). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
64. van Maanen, L., van Rijn, H., & Taatgen, N. A. (2009). Accumulators in context: An integrated theory of context effects on memory retrieval. Manuscript submitted for publication.
65. van Rij, J., van Rijn, H., & Hendriks, P. (2009). Cognitive architectures and language acquisition: A case study in pronoun comprehension. Manuscript submitted for publication.
66. van Rijn, H., & Anderson, J. R. (2003). Modeling lexical decision as ordinary retrieval. In F. Detje, D. Dörner, & H. Schaub (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (pp. 207-212). Bamberg: Universitätsverlag Bamberg.
67. van Rijn, H., & Anderson, J. R. (2004). The pseudohomophone baseword frequency effect explained. Paper presented at the Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing Conference (AMLaP), Aix-en-Provence.
68. van Rijn, H., & Taatgen, N. A. (2008). Timing of multiple overlapping intervals: How many clocks do we have? Acta Psychologica, 129, 365-375.
69. Van Selst, M., & Jolicœur, P. (1997). Decision and response in dualtask interference. Cognitive Psychology, 33, 266-307.
70. Van Veen, V., & Carter, C. S. (2005). Separating semantic conflict and response conflict in the Stroop task: A functional MRI study. NeuroImage, 27, 497-504.
71. Vukovic, R. K., Wilson, A. M., & Nash, K. K. (2004). Naming speed deficits in adults with reading disabilities: A test of the double-deficit hypothesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 440-450.
72. Welford, A. T. (1967). Single-channel operation in brain. Acta Psychologica, 27, 5-22.
73. Welford, A. T. (1980). The single-channel hypothesis. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction times (pp. 215-252). London: Academic Press.
74. Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202-238.