The Stroop Effect On Cognitive Processing Speed

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).

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.

This experiment investigated the Stroop effect comparing response times between naming colour ink printed in colour-associated words and colour neutral words. Previous research of two-process theories which support Stroop's studies [cited in Edgar:2007] found that automatic processes can interfere with controlled processes. To test this interference further, colour-associated words were employed. Results of this experiment show a statistically significant difference in condition response times, with naming the colour ink printed in colour-associated words taking longer than those in colour

A study was conducted by J.R. Stroop in order to test the effects of automaticity, specifically on reading. In one condition, Stroop presented his participants with 100 words, each of which spelled out a color, but the ink of the word was a different color than

In Stroop’s (1935) interference article, it was discovered that there is more interference in color naming then color reading. The experiment described in the article tested whether there was more interference from words or from colors (Stroop 1935). Two tests were administered each with a separate control. The RCNd test determined how fast one could read color names where the color was different from the color name while the NCWd test determined how fast one could name colors where the color was different from the word on the page. The mean time for 100 responses increased from 63.3 seconds on the RCNd test to 110.3 seconds on the NCWd test or an

In the Stroop (1935) experiment he has proved that the effect is going to be one of the two slower or faster. In the non-conflict, some of the participants had to read two sets of words: set one with word written in their contradicting word so this has made it to be conflicting. Stroop (1935) came out to find that there are different association of words and the colors. Stroop (1935) wanted to see if they had any differences in the reaction time when the association was conducted. He noticed that the participants took longer read the conflicting word rather than the actual name word. The non-conflict was much easier and faster to do.

In the Stroop task, participants are asked to name the colour of the ink that a colour word is written in, while ignoring the written the word (Goldfarb et al., 2011; Raz et al., 2006). The task is comprised of congruent words, where the ink colour and the written word match and incongruent words, where the ink colour and the written word do not match. The Stroop task has illustrated that participants respond slower and less accurately when the word is incongruent compared to when it is congruent (Goldfarb et al., 2011; Raz et al., 2006). The difference in the accuracy and speed of responses between the congruent and incongruent words is called the Stroop Effect (Goldfarb et al., 2011; Raz et al., 2006). Research has suggested that this occurs

This study looked at the Horse Race Model and whether it is the main reason for the presence of the Stroop effect. This study was conducted to test if the Horse Race Model is a valid reason for the Stroop effect as there has been some conflict in past research it seemed another study was needed.

The stroop effect is a strange phenomenon when your right and left side of your brain have a conflict about what the word says and what color the word is. I am going to make a project to examine everyone’s attempt and graph it. I am going to see if the difficulty is harder or easier compared to the age and gender of the challengers.

At the beginning stages, reading takes some effort, and conscious attempts at sounding out the letters of each word. As people practice reading skills, they finally learn to read without trying. When a behavior or skill no longer requires direct effort to be completed, cognitive psychologists say it is automatized (CogLab). Automatization is fascinating because it is an important part of daily life. Most people perform a numerous of automatized behaviors quickly and effortlessly. People often think they can multi-task, but classic research by J. Ridley Stroop shows differently. Stroop (1935) demonstrated that if someone is reading information, and other conflicting information is added, the rate in which a person will read the information would slow down. Stroop presented his participant with 100 words, each word spelled out a color, but the ink of the word was different from what it spelled. His participants were asked to report the color of the ink the word represented. The interface of conflicting color stimuli upon the time for reading 100 words caused an increase 2.3 seconds over the normal time for reading the same words printed in black (Stroop, 1935). Stoop found that participants performed slower to read the color of ink when the ink was used to produce color names different from the color of the ink. For example, the participants were slower to identify red ink when it spelled the word blue. The reasoning for this experiment is to test the Strop effect. The experimental hypothesis is that the time of reading the incongruent list of digits will be longer than that of the congruent list of

In the 1930’s, psychologists wanted to better understand how the brain processes presented information. To take it a step further, they wanted to see what happened when conflicting factors were presented and how the brain would process it. Would there be a delayed response? Would there be an error when giving the response? Psychologists were especially interested in how conflicting factors would inhibit the rate of impulse transmission in the nervous system (Eberle, 2012) and in 1935 John Ridley Stroop came up with an experiment to test the response rate of people when they were presented with conflicting factors.

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 psychological phenomenon called the Stroop effect was first popularized by John Ridley Stroop’s series of experiments (1935). Stroop investigated the conflicting stimuli of color identification and reading, and whether practice could diminish interference effects. His first experiment compared the speed at which it took participants to read 100 color-words printed in black ink with the same list of words printed in incongruent colors. Stroop found participants took an average 2.3 seconds longer to read black-printed words, which was, “…not reliable, which is in agreement with Peterson’s prediction made when the test was first proposed,” (p. 17). In his second experiment, Stroop compared the speed at which participants identified colored squares with the naming of ink color a color-word was printed