Object-based Attentional Selection Can Modulate the Stroop Effect

Overview

Journal Mem Cognit

Specialty Psychology

Date 2003 Dec 4

PMID 14651304

Citations 9

Authors

Peter Wuhr

Florian Waszak

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The Stroop (1935) effect is the inability to ignore a color word when the task is to report the ink color of that word (i.e., to say "green" to the word RED in green ink). The present study investigated whether object-based processing contributes to the Stroop effect. According to this view, observers are unable to ignore irrelevant features of an attended object (Kahneman & Henik, 1981). In three experiments, participants had to name the color of one of two superimposed rectangles and to ignore words that appeared in the relevant object, in the irrelevant object, or in the background. The words were congruent, neutral, or incongruent with respect to the correct color response. Words in the irrelevant object and in the background produced significant Stroop effects, consistent with earlier findings. Importantly, however, words in the relevant object produced larger Stroop effects than did the other conditions, suggesting amplified processing of all the features of an attended object. Thus, object-based processing can modulate the Stroop effect.

Citing Articles

The Impact of Speed-Accuracy Instructions on Spatial Congruency Effects.

Heuer H, Wuhr P J Cogn. 2023; 6(1):49.

PMID: 37636012 PMC: 10453986. DOI: 10.5334/joc.318.

Relative, not absolute, stimulus size is responsible for a correspondence effect between physical stimulus size and left/right responses.

Wuhr P, Richter M Atten Percept Psychophys. 2022; 84(4):1342-1358.

PMID: 35460026 PMC: 9032296. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-022-02490-7.

Anti-saccade error rates as a measure of attentional bias in cocaine dependent subjects.

Dias N, Schmitz J, Rathnayaka N, Red S, Sereno A, Moeller F Behav Brain Res. 2015; 292:493-9.

PMID: 26164486 PMC: 4558359. DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2015.07.006.

Sequential grouping modulates the effect of non-simultaneous masking on auditory intensity resolution.

Oberfeld D, Stahn P PLoS One. 2012; 7(10):e48054.

PMID: 23110174 PMC: 3480468. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048054.

Effects of speech rate and practice on the allocation of visual attention in multiple object naming.

Meyer A, Wheeldon L, van der Meulen F, Konopka A Front Psychol. 2012; 3:39.

PMID: 22363310 PMC: 3282304. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00039.

References

Posner M, Snyder C, Davidson B . Attention and the detection of signals. J Exp Psychol. 1980; 109(2):160-74. View

Duncan J . Selective attention and the organization of visual information. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1984; 113(4):501-17. DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.113.4.501. View

Melara R, Mounts J . Selective attention to Stroop dimensions: effects of baseline discriminability, response mode, and practice. Mem Cognit. 1993; 21(5):627-45. DOI: 10.3758/bf03197195. View

Brown T, Gore C, Carr T . Visual attention and word recognition in stroop color naming: is word recognition "automatic"?. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2002; 131(2):220-40. DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.131.2.220. View

Yantis S, Jonides J . Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: evidence from visual search. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1984; 10(5):601-21. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.5.601. View

Vecera S, Farah M . Does visual attention select objects or locations?. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1994; 123(2):146-60. DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.123.2.146. View

Dyer F . Interference and facilitation for color naming with separate bilateral presentations of the word and color. J Exp Psychol. 1973; 99(3):314-7. DOI: 10.1037/h0035245. View

Lu C, Proctor R . The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013; 2(2):174-207. DOI: 10.3758/BF03210959. View

van der Heijden A, Hagenaar R, Bloem W . Two stages in postcategorical filtering and selection. Mem Cognit. 1984; 12(5):458-69. DOI: 10.3758/bf03198307. View

10.

Virzi R, Egeth H . Toward a translational model of Stroop interference. Mem Cognit. 1985; 13(4):304-19. DOI: 10.3758/bf03202499. View

11.

Hagenaar R, van der Heijden A . Target-noise separation in visual selective attention. Acta Psychol (Amst). 1986; 62(2):161-76. DOI: 10.1016/0001-6918(86)90066-1. View

12.

TREISMAN A . Strategies and models of selective attention. Psychol Rev. 1969; 76(3):282-99. DOI: 10.1037/h0027242. View

13.

Shalev L, Algom D . Stroop and Garner effects in and out of Posner's beam: reconciling two conceptions of selective attention. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000; 26(3):997-1017. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.26.3.997. View

14.

Glaser W, Dungelhoff F . The time course of picture-word interference. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1984; 10(5):640-54. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.5.640. View

15.

Eriksen C, St James J . Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: a zoom lens model. Percept Psychophys. 1986; 40(4):225-40. DOI: 10.3758/bf03211502. View

16.

Macleod C . Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychol Bull. 1991; 109(2):163-203. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163. View

17.

Macleod C . Training on integrated versus separated Stroop tasks: the progression of interference and facilitation. Mem Cognit. 1998; 26(2):201-11. DOI: 10.3758/bf03201133. View

18.

Dyer F . The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the stlldy of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes. Mem Cognit. 2013; 1(2):106-20. DOI: 10.3758/BF03198078. View

19.

Algom D . The Stroop effect: it is not the robust phenomenon that you have thought it to be. Mem Cognit. 2001; 28(8):1437-49. DOI: 10.3758/bf03211844. View

20.

Lowe D, Mitterer J . Selective and divided Attention in a Stroop task. Can J Psychol. 1982; 36(4):684-700. DOI: 10.1037/h0080661. View