Abstract
The influence of word reading on Stroop color naming decreases as a function of the proportion of test items that are incongruent. This proportion-congruent effect is usually ascribed to strategies (e.g., maintaining task set) that operate at a general level to moderate the extent to which participants are influenced by word reading. However, in three experiments, effects at the level of specific items were found. Interference and facilitation were smaller for color names usually presented in an incongruent color than for color names usually presented in their congruent colors. This item-specific proportioncongruent manipulation affected the process dissociation (PD) estimate of the influence of word-reading processes but not that of color-naming processes. The results (1) indicate that item-specific, as opposed to general, mechanisms can reduce the influence of word-reading processes on Stroop performance and (2) demonstrate the PD procedure’s utility in studying Stroop phenomena.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., &McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing model of the Stroop effect.Psychological Review,97, 332–361.
De Jong, R. D., Berendson, E., &Cools, R. (1999). Goal neglect and inhibitory limitations: Dissociable causes of interference effects in conflict situations.Acta Psychologica,101, 379–394.
Duncan, J. (1990). Goal weighting and the choice of behavior in a complex world.Ergonomics,33, 1265–1279.
Duncan, J. (1993). Selection of input and goal in the control of behavior. In A. D. Baddeley & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.),Attention: Selection, awareness, and control. A tribute to Donald Broadbent (pp. 53–71). New York: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press.
Duncan, J. (1995). Attention, intelligence, and the frontal lobes. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.),The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 721–733). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hillstrom, A. P., &Logan, G. D. (1997). Process dissociations, cognitive architecture, and response time: Comment on Lindsay and Jacoby (1994).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 1562–1578.
Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory & Language,30, 513–541.
Jacoby, L. L., McElree, B., &Trainham, T. N. (1999). Automatic influences as accessibility bias in memory and Stroop-like tasks: Toward a formal model. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.),Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance. Interaction of theory and application (pp. 461–486). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kane, M. J., & Engle, R.W. (2002).Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Lindsay, D. S., &Jacoby, L. L. (1994). Stroop process dissociations: The relationship between facilitation and interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 219–234.
Logan, G.D. (1980). Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: Theory and data.Cognitive Psychology,12, 523–553.
Logan, G. D., &Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task.Memory & Cognition,7, 166–174.
Logan, G.D., Zbrodoff, N. J., &Williamson, J. (1984). Strategies in the color-word Stroop task.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,22, 135–138.
Lowe, D., &Mitterer, J. O. (1982). Selective and divided attention in a Stroop task.Canadian Journal of Psychology,36, 684–700.
MacLeod, C.M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin,109, 163–203.
Musen, G., &Squire, L. R. (1993). Implicit learning of color-word as-sociations using a Stroop paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 789–798.
Roberts, R. J., Jr., &Pennington, B. F. (1996). An interactive framework for examining prefrontal cognitive processes.Developmental Neuropsychology,12, 105–126.
Shor, R. E. (1975). An auditory analog of the Stroop test.Journal of General Psychology,93, 281–288.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology,18, 643–662.
Toth, J. P., Levine, B., Stuss, D. T., Oh, A., Winocur, G., &Meiran, N. (1995). Dissociation of processes underlying S-R compatibility: Evidence for the independent influence of what and where.Consciousness & Cognition,4, 483–501.
Trainham, T. N., Lindsay, D. S., &Jacoby, L. L. (1997). Stroop process dissociations: Reply to Hillstrom and Logan (1997).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 1579–1587.
Tzelgov, J., Henik, A., &Berger, J. (1992). Controlling Stroop effects by manipulating expectations for color words.Memory & Cognition,20, 727–735.
West, R. (1999). Age differences in lapses of intention in the Stroop task.Journals of Gerontology: Series B. Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences,54, P34-P43.
West, R., &Baylis, G. C. (1998). Effects of increased response dominance and contextual disintegration on the Stroop interference effect in older adults.Psychology & Aging,13, 206–217.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by research grants from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada to L.L.J. and D.S.L. and by National Institute on Aging Grant AG13845 to L.L.J.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jacoby, L.L., Lindsay, D.S. & Hessels, S. Item-specific control of automatic processes: Stroop process dissociations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10, 638–644 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196526
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196526