Viviani G, Visalli A, Montefinese M, Vallesi A, Ambrosini E
Behav Res Methods. 2023; 56(5):4758-4785.
PMID: 37620747
PMC: 11289023.
DOI: 10.3758/s13428-023-02215-0.
Klackl J, Blechert J, Jonas E
Brain Behav. 2023; 13(6):e3008.
PMID: 37165754
PMC: 10275559.
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.3008.
Quetard B, Spatola N, Parris B, Ferrand L, Augustinova M
PLoS One. 2023; 18(1):e0279036.
PMID: 36656875
PMC: 9851562.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279036.
Xiang X, Yan L, Fu S, Nan W
Front Psychol. 2022; 13:1022999.
PMID: 36438366
PMC: 9686333.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1022999.
Parris B, Hasshim N, Wadsley M, Augustinova M, Ferrand L
Psychol Res. 2021; 86(4):1029-1053.
PMID: 34389901
PMC: 9090875.
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-021-01554-x.
Two processing stages of the SNARC effect.
Nan W, Yan L, Yang G, Liu X, Fu S
Psychol Res. 2021; 86(2):375-385.
PMID: 33847782
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-021-01506-5.
Modulation of Emotional Conflict Processing by High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-TDCS).
Kuehne M, Schmidt K, Heinze H, Zaehle T
Front Behav Neurosci. 2019; 13:224.
PMID: 31680891
PMC: 6798048.
DOI: 10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00224.
The Loci of Stroop Interference and Facilitation Effects With Manual and Vocal Responses.
Augustinova M, Parris B, Ferrand L
Front Psychol. 2019; 10:1786.
PMID: 31481908
PMC: 6709679.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01786.
The Stroop-matching task as a tool to study the correspondence effect using images of graspable and non-graspable objects.
Caldas A, Machado-Pinheiro W, Daneyko O, Riggio L
Psychol Res. 2019; 84(7):1815-1828.
PMID: 31030272
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-019-01191-5.
Numerical processing efficiency improved in children using mental abacus: ERP evidence utilizing a numerical Stroop task.
Yao Y, Du F, Wang C, Liu Y, Weng J, Chen F
Front Hum Neurosci. 2015; 9:245.
PMID: 26042012
PMC: 4436880.
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00245.
The effect of correlated linguistic dimensions on speeded classification of visually presented trigrams.
Flowers J
Mem Cognit. 2013; 2(2):372-8.
PMID: 24214771
DOI: 10.3758/BF03209012.
Stroop interference with response, comparison, and encoding stages in a sentence-picture comparison task.
Seymour P
Mem Cognit. 2013; 2(1):19-26.
PMID: 24214693
DOI: 10.3758/BF03197486.
The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the stlldy of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes.
Dyer F
Mem Cognit. 2013; 1(2):106-20.
PMID: 24214501
DOI: 10.3758/BF03198078.
The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects.
Lu C, Proctor R
Psychon Bull Rev. 2013; 2(2):174-207.
PMID: 24203654
DOI: 10.3758/BF03210959.
Asymmetry in stimulus and response conflict processing across the adult lifespan: ERP and EMG evidence.
Killikelly C, Szucs D
Cortex. 2013; 49(10):2888-903.
PMID: 24134924
PMC: 3878767.
DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2013.08.017.
Functional definition of the N450 event-related brain potential marker of conflict processing: a numerical stroop study.
Szucs D, Soltesz F
BMC Neurosci. 2012; 13:35.
PMID: 22452924
PMC: 3383462.
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2202-13-35.
The use of visual and name codes in scanning and classifying colors.
Flowers J, Dutch S
Mem Cognit. 2011; 4(4):384-90.
PMID: 21287379
DOI: 10.3758/BF03213194.
The developmental pattern of stimulus and response interference in a color-object Stroop task: an ERP study.
Jongen E, Jonkman L
BMC Neurosci. 2008; 9:82.
PMID: 18775060
PMC: 2535779.
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2202-9-82.
On the role of stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect.
De Houwer J
Mem Cognit. 2003; 31(3):353-9.
PMID: 12795477
DOI: 10.3758/bf03194393.
Differential components of the manual and vocal Stroop tasks.
Sharma D, McKenna F
Mem Cognit. 1998; 26(5):1033-40.
PMID: 9796234
DOI: 10.3758/bf03201181.
