The Stroop 's Stroop Experiment

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 Stroop test consisted two major posters of word lists: Incongruent list and Neutral list. Each poster included 20 words in 2 columns of 10 words each. All letters were stenciled, capitalized and 1 ¾ inches high. Both incongruent and neutral words were listed on the 56 x 71 cm posters Stopwatch with 0.01-second accuracy was used to time to measure how long participants took to read both incongruent and neutral word lists, which is a dependent variable for this experiment.

The Stroop experiment can be traced back as far as the nineteen century around the time of some particular works of Cattell and Wundt. The experiment was first written about in 1929 in German. The experiment was name after John Ridley Stroop after he had written the article “Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions,” which was published in 1935.there have been over 700 replications of this experiment

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

The research assessed in this article discusses the Stroop effect. The Stroop effect occurs when our selective attention fails and we are unable to attend to some information and ignore the rest. This study tests the Stroop effect by presenting the participant with a congruent or incongruent word and the participant is asked to type the color of the word or the actual word in a series of trials. In this research, it has been found that participants had faster reaction times for congruent items and slower reaction times for incongruent items. In addition, participants had faster reaction times when

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.

     I-Mac G3 computers and a program from Old Mississippi University were used to test the lateralized Stroop effect from http://psychexp.olemiss.edu. The name of the actual program was the Lateralized Stroop Experiment. The stimuli used by this program were colors that appeared laterally on a computer screen. Not only did the colors appear laterally but in differing hemispheres on the computer screen. The colors were in the form of written words. For example the word “red” was shown in green font. This was be an example of an incongruent stimulus because the written color word did not agree with the font color shown. An example of

Would practice effect Stroop interference and if so what would this tell us about the Stroop Effect (MacLeod, 1991)? This question was investigated by having participants learn names of Armenian letters and then read the small English and Armenian letters that were composed to form large English and Armenian letters respectively (McLeod, 1991). The results provided evidence that interference was the same for both English (practiced) and Armenian letters (McLeod, 1991). Why then does automatic reading make one susceptible to the Stroop Effect? A possible explanation is attention. During automatic processing, more attention goes to processing the information in dimension a than in dimension b. Processing and naming ink color requires more attention than reading, and so reading will cause interference because it requires less attention (McLeod,

In conclusion the experiment was successful since it supported the aim of the experiment and it was consitance ing what Stroop find in his inteference experiment which was that it took longer time for participants to identify the color of the word stimuli since the participants are more familiar with the identification of color boxes and its much more easier than identifying word stimuli since there schemas do not recognize as quickly as it does with just naming colors. However i would do this experiment again but instead i would associate the time it takes identifying colors of boxes and word stimuli if the participant had a 3.5 gpa or avove and the time it took a participant to identify color boxes and the color word stimuli if the participant

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

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.