The Effect Of Automatic And Controlled Processing On The Way Of Thinking

The Stroop effect is demonstrated by the reaction time to determine a color when the color is printed in a different color’s name. Participants respond slower or make more errors when the meaning of the word is incongruent with the color of the word. Despite knowing the meaning of the word, participants showed incapability of ignoring the stimulus attribute. This reflects a clear instance of semantic interference and an unfathomed failure of selective attention (Stroop, 1935).

An interesting challenge arises when a task such as color naming is identified as both controlled and automatic, by varying the other task involved. Color naming is identified as a controlled process when the other task is word reading, but as an automatic process when the other task is shape naming. Cohen, Dunbar and McClelland (1990) proposed an alternative explanation of the Stroop effect, which does not distinguish between automatic and controlled processing. Instead, they proposed that automaticity is a range, and that Stroop interference depends on the relative degree of learning the particular tasks, not on processing speed.

The Stroop effect was tested on four different tasks. Nineteen Queens College students were recruited by flyer, and each were assigned to a word reading task, color reading task, color inhibition task, and word inhibition task. They were timed using a stopwatch function on a cell phone, to name the color, or word to the quickest of their ability. In the order from longest reaction time to shortest: inhibition color naming task, color naming task, inhibition word reading, and word reading. This study shows that people can read words more quickly than they can name colors, and that inhibiting an automatic response to color/word tasks will take longer to do than tasks that do not involve inhibition.

The Stroop experiment by J. Ridley Stroop in 1935 was performed in order to analyze the reaction time of participant’s stimuli and desired results while also obtaining a collective result of color interference and word reading(Stroop, 1935; Lee & Chan, 2000). In the experiment three forms of the test were given, the first consisting of color patches, the second had the color words printed in black and the other was an incongruent test beaming the color did not match the color word

The aim of this experiment is to study autonomic processes by replicating the previously carried out Stroop effect by using numbers. A number of 180 random participants aged in between 18-89 were recruited to participate in this experiment. Participants were presented with a stroop experiment task sheet which consists of three parts which was the control, congruent and incongruent conditions. Time was taken and recorded for each participant to say out the number of stars in the control condition and to say out the number of numbers in the congruent and incongruent conditions. Based on the results, participants took a considerably longer time to say the number of number in the incongruent condition than in the congruent condition.

The experiment is a demonstration of reaction time of a task . The Stroop experiment employs two basic processes of cognition; attention (“the concentration of mental effort on sensory or mental events”) and automaticity (“a cognitive process that does not require conscious thought as a result of existing cognitive structures

In the Stroop task 8 college student participants from a cognitive lab course. Two participants were males and the remaining 6 participants were female. Using a computerized program Cedrus SuperLab 4.5 the participants were tested in the Stroop Task. The participants were asked to identify four colors, blue, green, red or yellow. In addition, participants were also asked to identify the names of the colors they saw by pressing a corresponding computer key with their middle and index fingers, D for red, F for blue, J for green, and K for yellow. Our experiment was conducted in two phases a practice phase and a testing phase.

In 1935, the Stroop Effect was first established by John Ridley Stroop. Research done by John Ridley Stroop emphasizes the processing of words that it has on the more studious challenge of naming just the ink color. The Stroop Effect is a proof of interference in the reaction time of an exercise. In the Stroop Effect, subjects are tested only on naming colors of incompatible words and of control patches (MacLeod 1991). Many tests can be distributed, all varied in the colors and words. Any color can be used; the same goes with any word being used. Subjects receive a time of how long it took them to read each test; where the subjects find a time difference between the different tests. When taking some of these tests, people may experience a mental sensation comparable to running in a swimming pool (Bower 1992).

The Stroop effect: how your brain reacts to conflicting information You can’t always believe what you see. You may have learned your colors before you learned how to read, but what happens when there is conflict between both color recognition and word recognition? The Stroop effect uses the conflict between words and colors to show, how your brain reacts to the conflicting information between the two. By psychologist definition the Stroop effect is a demonstration of interference in the reaction time of a task. The Stroop effect was originally written about by a man named John Ridley Stroop in the 1930’s.

In Stroop's experiment, the stimulus presented contains two kinds of information (word meaning and the color of writing it), and the processing of these two kinds of information is different. When these two pieces of information are input at the same time, it is difficult to do the processing on only one of the pieces of information and not on the other. Because of the ease with which words are processed, people tend to report meaning. However, this experiment does not allow this reaction. Therefore, the two processing processes are prone to competition, resulting in a difference in the speed of the reaction, resulting in confusion and confusion of the meaning of the word in its writing. For example, Many low-level human behaviors are automatic, in that a passport serves to elicit the behavior in the absence of conscious awareness or

The Stroop Effect experiment generalized selective attention and how it affects our everyday thinking. The experiments main focus depicts how selective attention impacts our everyday lives and how efficient/ effective our thinking process can be. It is a classical phenomenon well versed in experimental psychology. The stroop tasks describes a task in which participants must identify color names printed in an opposing color of the presented word and read color names where the color of the print is the same as the word.

If the reaction time between the stimulus and the response increases when the colour of the word and the word itself are not the same, then the reaction time would decrease when the word and the colour of the word are the same. The Stroop effect is an observable way to view the difficulties the brain has in identifying conflicting sensory information. The conflicting sensory data that people are given will affect the time of their responses and impact on their ability to read the information out correctly and fluently.

In 1935, John Ridley Stroop conducted an experiment at George Peabody College for teachers in the United States. Stroop used 70 college undergraduates as subject in his experiment, he compared times for reading names of colours and naming colours themselves. The aim was to determine if the colour of the word affected the ability to read it. In the experiment, there was three different conditions. In the first condition participants were asked to read words as quickly as possible whereas participants had to name the ink colour in which each word were printed as quickly as possible in second condition. In a third condition (the incongruent condition), participants had to name the ink colour in which each word was printed, but in this condition the words themselves were colour names. For example, the word ‘GREEN’ was presented in the colour orange and you were required to read this colour instead of the word itself. Stroop found that the participants were much slower at naming the ink colours when the stimuli were themselves colours as (third condition), indicating that a possible explanation for the Stroop effect is that people quickly and automatically process the meaning of the word.

The 'Stroop effect', a measure of interference in a reaction time task, was investigated. Twenty undergraduate students of mixed age and gender were each presented with 48 coloured words in turn. These were divided into 16 of each of 3 levels of congruence. The time required to identify the colour of each stimulus was recorded, and related to whether the word presented identified, contrasted with or contained an unrelated meaning to the font colour it was displayed in. This data was collected and compared in order to assess the median time taken to

We are replicating J.R. Stroop’s original experiment The Stroop Effect (Stroop, 1935). The aim of the study was to understand how automatic processing interferes with attempts to attend to sensory information. The independent variable of our experiment was the three conditions, the congruent words, the incongruent words, and the colored squares, and the dependent variable was the time that it took participants to state the ink color of the list of words in each condition. We used repeated measures for the experiment in order to avoid influence of extraneous variables. The participants were 16-17 years of age from Garland High School. The participants will be timed on how long it takes them to say the color of the squares and the color of the words. The research was conducted in the Math Studies class. The participants were aged 16-17 and were students at Garland High School. The results showed that participants took the most time with the incongruent words.