Suggestion does not de-automatize word reading: Evidence from the semantically based Stroop task

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 521-527

  Augustinova, Maria ^a   Ferrand, Ludovic ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ BLAISE PASCAL   (France)

Author keywords

Automaticity; Controlled mental processes; Semantic activation; Stroop interference; Suggestion; Word reading

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860878866     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0217-y     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Augustinova, M., & Ferrand, L. (2007). Influence de la présentation bicolore des mots sur l'effet Stroop [First-letter coloring and the Stroop effect]. L'Année Psychologique, 107, 163-179.
2. Augustinova, M., Flaudias, V., & Ferrand, L. (2010). Single-letter coloring and spatial cuing do not eliminate or reduce a semantic contribution to the Stroop effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 827-833.
3. Bargh, J. A. (1994). The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In R. S. Wyer Jr. & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (2nd ed., pp. 1-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Besner, D., & Stolz, J. A. (1999). What kind of attention modulates the Stroop effect? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 99-104. doi: 10. 3758/BF03210815.
5. Besner, D., Stolz, J. A., & Boutilier, C. (1997). The Stroop effect and the myth of automaticity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 221-225. doi: 10. 3758/BF03209396.
6. Brown, M. S., & Besner, D. (2001). On a variant of Stroop's paradigm: Which cognitions press your buttons? Memory & Cognition, 29, 903-904.
7. Brown, T. L., Gore, C. L., & Carr, T. H. (2002). Visual attention and word recognition in Stroop color naming: Is word recognition "automatic"? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 220-240. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 131. 2. 220.
8. Brown, T. L., Joneleit, K., Robinson, C. S., & Brown, C. R. (2002). Automaticity in reading and the Stroop task: Testing the limits of involuntary word processing. The American Journal of Psychology, 115, 515-543.
9. Casiglia, E., Schiff, S., Facco, E., Gabbana, A., Tikhonoff, V., Schiavon, L.,... Amodio, P. (2010). Neurophysiological correlates of post-hypnotic alexia: A controlled study with Stroop test. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 52, 219-233.
10. Cohen, J. D. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Dalrymple-Alford, E. C. (1972). Associative facilitation and effect in the Stroop color-word task. Perception & Psychophysics, 11, 274-276.
12. Forster, K. I., & Forster, J. C. (2003). DMDX: A Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 116-124. doi: 10. 3758/BF03195503.
13. Goldfarb, L., Aisenberg, D., & Henik, A. (2011). Think the thought, walk the walk-Social priming reduces the Stroop effect. Cognition, 118, 193-200.
14. Heil, M., Rolke, B., & Pecchinenda, A. (2004). Automatic semantic activation is no myth. Psychological Science, 15, 852-857.
15. Huguet, P., Galvaing, M. P., Monteil, J.-M., & Dumas, F. (1999). Social presence effects in the Stroop task: Further evidence for an attentional view of social facilitation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1011-1023.
16. Klein, G. S. (1964). Semantic power measured through the effect of words with color-naming. The American Journal of Psychology, 77, 576-588.
17. Küper, K., & Heil, M. (2008). Letter search does not affect semantic priming in a probe naming task. Acta Psychologica, 129, 325-331.
18. MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 109. 2. 163.
19. MacLeod, C. M., & McDonald, P. (1995). Facilitation in the Stroop task is artifactual. Paper presented at the 36th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Los Angeles.
20. MacLeod, C. M., & Sheehan, P. W. (2003). Hypnotic control of attention in the Stroop task: A historical footnote. Consciousness and Cognition, 12, 347-353.
21. Manwell, L. A., Roberts, M. A., & Besner, D. (2004). Single letter coloring and spatial cuing eliminates a semantic contribution to the Stroop effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 458-462.
22. Neely, J. H., & Kahan, T. A. (2001). Is semantic activation automatic? A critical re-evaluation. In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 69-93). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi: 10. 1037/10394-005.
23. New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., & Ferrand, L. (2004). Lexique 2: A new French lexical database. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 516-524. doi: 10. 3758/BF03195598.
24. Oakley, D. A., & Halligan, P. W. (2011). Using hypnosis to gain insights into healthy and pathological cognitive functioning. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 328-331.
25. Raz, A., & Campbell, N. K. J. (2011). Can suggestion obviate reading? Supplementing primary Stroop evidence with exploratory negative priming analyses. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 312-320.
26. Raz, A., Fan, J., & Posner, M. I. (2005). Hypnotic suggestion reduces conflict in the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 9978-9983. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0503064102.
27. Raz, A., Kirsch, I., Pollard, J., & Nitkin-Kaner, Y. (2006). Suggestion reduces the Stroop effect. Psychological Science, 17, 91-95.
28. Raz, A., Landzberg, K. S., Schweizer, H. R., Zephrani, Z. R., Shapiro, T., Fan, J., & Posner, M. I. (2003). Posthypnotic suggestion and the modulation of Stroop interference under cycloplegia. Consciousness and Cognition, 12, 332-346.
29. Raz, A., Moreno-Iniguez, M., Martin, L., & Zhu, H. (2007). Suggestion overrides the Stroop effect in highly hypnotizable individuals. Consciousness and Cognition, 16, 331-338.
30. Raz, A., Shapiro, T., Fan, J., & Posner, M. I. (2002). Hypnotic suggestion and the modulation of Stroop interference. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59, 1155-1161.
31. Reynolds, M., & Besner, D. (2006). Reading aloud is not automatic: Processing capacity is required to generate a phonological code from print. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1303-1323.
32. Sharma, D., Booth, R., Brown, R., & Huguet, P. (2010). Exploring the temporal dynamics of social facilitation in the Stroop task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 52-58.
33. Sharma, D., & McKenna, F. P. (1998). Differential components of the manual and vocal Stroop tasks. Memory & Cognition, 26, 1033-1040.
34. Shor, R., & Orne, E. C. (1962). Harvard group scale of hypnotic susceptibility: Form A. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
35. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 121. 1. 15.
36. 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.
37. Tse, C.-S., & Neely, J. H. (2007). Semantic priming from letter-searched primes occurs for low- but not high-frequency targets: Automatic semantic access may not be a myth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1143-1161.
38. Weitzenhoffer, A. M., & Hilgard, E. R. (1962). Stanford hypnotic susceptibility scale: Form C. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.