Stop interfering: Stroop task conflict independence from informational conflict and interference

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 66, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 1356-1367

  Kalanthroff, Eyal ^a   Goldfarb, Liat ^b   Usher, Marius ^c   Henik, Avishai ^a  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

^c TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Anterior cingulate cortex; Executive functions; Reverse facilitation; Stroop; Task conflict

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; CONFLICT; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; MALE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; READING; STROOP TEST; STUDENT; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ATTENTION; COLOR PERCEPTION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); CUES; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; READING; STROOP TEST; STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84880045856     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2012.741606     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aarts, E., Roelofs, A. and van Turennouta, M. 2009. Attentional control of task and response in lateral and medial frontal cortex: Brain activity and reaction time distributions. Neuropsychologia, 47: 2089 - 2099. (doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.03.019)
2. Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A. and Hsieh, S. 1994. " Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks ". In Attention and performance XV, Edited by: Umiltà, C. and Moscovitch, M. 421 - 452. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Allport, A. and Wylie, G. 2000. " Task-switching, stimulus-response bindings and negative priming ". In Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII, Edited by: Monsell, S. and Driver, J. 35 - 70. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Banich, M. T. 2009. Executive function: The search for an integrated account. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18: 89 - 94. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01615.x)
5. Bench, C. J., Frith, C. D., Grasby, P. M., Friston, K. J., Paulesu, E. Frackowiak, R. S. 1993. Investigations of the functional anatomy of attention using the Stroop test. Neuropsychologia, 32: 907 - 922. (doi:10.1016/0028-3932(93)90147-R)
6. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S. and Cohen, J. D. 2001. Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108: 624 - 652. (doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624)
7. Botvinick, M. M., Nystrom, L. E., Fissell, K., Carter, C. S. and Cohen, J. D. 1999. Conflict monitoring versus selection-for-action in anterior cingulate cortex. Nature, 402: 179 - 181. (doi:10.1038/46035)
8. Braver, T. S. 2012. The variable nature of cognitive control: A dual mechanisms framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16: 106 - 113. (doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.12.010)
9. Braverman, A. and Meiran, N. 2010. Task conflict effect in task switching. Psychological Research, 74: 568 - 578. (doi:10.1007/s00426-010-0279-2)
10. Bugg, J. M., McDaniel, M. A., Scullin, M. K. and Braver, T. S. 2011. Revealing list-level control in the Stroop task by uncovering its benefits and a cost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37: 1595 - 1606. (doi:10.1037/a0024670)
11. Carter, C. S., Botvinick, M. M. and Cohen, J. D. 1999. The contribution of the anterior cingulated cortex to executive processes in cognition. Reviews in Neuroscience, 10: 49 - 57.
12. Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M. M., Noll, D. and Cohen, J. D. 1998. Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science, 280: 747 - 749. (doi:10.1126/science.280.5364.747)
13. Carter, C. S., Mintun, M. and Cohen, J. D. 1995. Interference and facilitation effects during selective attention: An H215O PET study of Stroop task performance. NeuroImage, 2: 264 - 272. (doi:10.1006/nimg.1995.1034)
14. Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K. and McClelland, J. L. 1990. On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97: 332 - 361. (doi:10.1037/0033-295X.97.3.332)
15. Cohen, J. D. and Servan-Schreiber, D. 1992. Context, cortex and dopamine: A connectionist approach to behavior and biology in schizophrenia. Psychological Review, 99: 45 - 77. (doi:10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.45)
16. Cousineau, D. 2005. Confidence intervals in within-subjects designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1: 42 - 45.
17. Dalrymple-Alford, E. C. and Budayr, B. 1966. Examination of some aspects of the Stroop color-word test. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 23: 1211 - 1214. (doi:10.2466/pms.1966.23.3f.1211)
18. David, I. A., Volchan, E., Vila, J., Keil, A., de Oliveira, L. Faria-Júnior, A. J. P. 2011. Stroop matching task: Role of feature selection and temporal modulation. Experimental Brain Research, 208: 595 - 605. (doi:10.1007/s00221-010-2507-9)
19. De Pisapia, N. and Braver, T. S. 2006. A model of dual control mechanisms through anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex interactions. Neurocomputing, 69: 1322 - 1326. (doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2005.12.100)
20. Goldfarb, L. and Henik, A. 2007. Evidence for task conflict in the Stroop effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33: 1170 - 1176. (doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.5.1170)
21. Kalanthroff, E., Goldfarb, L., & Henik, A. (in press). Evidence for interaction between the stop-signal and the Stroop task conflict. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. doi: 10.1037/a0027429.
22. Kalanthroff, E. and Henik, A. 2012. Individual but not fragile: Individual differences in task control predict Stroop facilitation, Manuscript submitted for publication.
23. La Heij, W. and Boelens, H. 2011. Color-object interference: Further tests of an executive control account. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108: 156 - 169. (doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.08.007)
24. La Heij, W., Boelens, H. and Kuipers, J. R. 2010. Object interference in children's colour and position naming: Lexical interference or task-set competition?. Language and Cognitive Processes, 25: 568 - 588. (doi:10.1080/01690960903381174)
25. Logan, G. D. 1994. " On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A user's guide to the stop signal paradigm ". In Inhibitory processes in attention, memory and language, Edited by: Dagenbach, D. and Carr, T. H. 189 - 239. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
26. Logan, G. D. and Cowan, W. B. 1984. On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A theory of an act of control. Psychological Review, 91: 295 - 327. (doi:10.1037/0033-295X.91.3.295)
27. 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)
28. MacLeod, C. M. and MacDonald, P. A. 2000. Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: Uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10: 383 - 391. (doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01530-8)
29. Melara, R. D. and Algom, D. 2003. Driven by information: A tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychological Review, 110: 422 - 471. (doi:10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.422)
30. Milham, M. P., Erickson, K. I., Banich, M. T., Kramer, A. F., Webb, A. Wszalek, T. 2002. Attentional control in the aging brain: Insights from an fMRI study of the Stroop task. Brain & Cognition, 49: 277 - 296. (doi:10.1006/brcg.2001.1501)
31. Miller, E. K. and Cohen, J. D. 2001. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24: 167 - 202. (doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167)
32. Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A. and Wager, T. D. 2000. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex "frontal lobe" tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41: 49 - 100. (doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734)
33. Monsell, S., Taylor, T. J. and Murphy, K. 2001. Naming the color of a word: Is it responses or task sets that compete?. Memory and Cognition, 29: 137 - 151. (doi:10.3758/BF03195748)
34. Rogers, R. D. and Monsell, S. 1995. Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124: 207 - 231. (doi:10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207)
35. Sabri, M., Melara, R. D. and Algom, D. 2001. A confluence of contexts: Asymmetric versus global failures of selective attention to Stroop dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27: 515 - 537. (doi:10.1037/0096-1523.27.3.515)
36. Shallice, T. and Norman, D. 1986. " Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior ". In Consciousness and self-regulation: Advances in research and theory, Edited by: Davidson, R., Schwartz, G. and Shapiro, D. Vol. 4, 1 - 18. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
37. Steinhauser, M. and Hubner, R. 2009. Distinguishing response conflict and task conflict in the Stroop task: Evidence from ex-Gaussian distribution analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35: 1398 - 1412. (doi:10.1037/a0016467)
38. Stroop, J. R. 1935. Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18: 643 - 662. (doi:10.1037/h0054651)
39. Tzelgov, J., Henik, A. and Berger, J. 1992. Controlling Stroop effects by manipulating expectations for color words. Memory & Cognition, 20: 727 - 735. (doi:10.3758/BF03202722)
40. Verbruggen, F. and Logan, G. 2008. Response inhibition in the stop-signal paradigm. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12: 418 - 424. (doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.005)
41. Waszak, F., Hommel, B. and Allport, D. A. 2003. Task switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46: 361 - 413. (doi:10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00520-0)