The aim of our experiment is to investigate the effect of two contradicting stimuli on the time it takes participants to name them correctly. The experiment was a simple replication of Stroop (1935). The design was a repeated measure and the participants were chosen by convenience sampling as it was most favorable. The IV was which word list would be presented, the word list in black ink or the one in colored ink. The DV was the time in seconds that it took the participants read off the list of words. The results supported the Stroop effect. The mean time it took participants to name the words in the first test, the one in black ink, was 30.62 seconds compared to 31.15 seconds in the test that featured the words in different colored ink. The …show more content…
An experiment in demonstration of this was conducted by J.R. Stroop (1935) who introduced the color naming experiment known as the Stroop Effect, where he showed that when people have to name words in different printed color it interferes with their abilities to read them efficiently. Stroop asked participants to read words as quickly as possible in one condition where words were printed in all black and in a second condition where participants had to name the ink color in which each word was printed as quickly as possible. Stroop found that the participants were much slower at naming the ink colors when they had the distracting stimuli of having it in a different color, indicating that a possible explanation for the Stroop effect is that people quickly and automatically process the meaning of the word. This would therefore interfere with the ability to process a color effectively in the second condition. In conclusion, Stroop stated that conflicting stimuli to a certain task interfere with with the person’s ability to complete it efficiently (J. R. Stroop 1935). The study is worth replicating as it shows the limitations of an essential human ability that is heavily relied on. The aim of our experiment is to investigate the effect of two contradicting stimuli on the time it takes participants to name them …show more content…
• The participant was then given the briefing instructions (Appendix II) which featured the area being studied and instructions.
• Participants read the list of words printed in black ink (Appendix V) first, using the cover sheet to reveal the next word once they read one off. If a participant identified a word wrong, then he or she must go back and correct themselves before continuing. Administrators pointed out errors.
• After the first trial, the administrator began a conversation with the participant about thanksgiving to avoid participant’s boredom and order effect.
• Participants then read the list of words printed in color ink (Appendix VI), reusing the cover sheet to reveal the next word once they read one off.
• Participants were then debriefed (Appendix III), thanking them for their participation and informed them that their results will remain
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.
However, evidence from a recent series of experiments conducted by MacLeod and Dunbar (1988) suggests that the processes involved in the Stroop task may have not been inadequate. In their experiment they taught participants to use color words as names for arbitrary shapes that actually appeared in a neutral color. After 288 trials where there was a 72 trials per stimulus, participants could perform this shape-naming task without difficulty. At this point, the effect that ink color had on shape naming was tested by presenting participants with conflicting and congruent stimuli for example, shapes colored to conflict or agree with their assigned names. Ink color produced large interference and facilitation effects. However, when the task was reversed, and subjects were asked to state the color of the ink in which the
Limitations are demand characteristics and that is why we used non-psychology students in order to reduce this variable. The independent variable was the color stimuli. In the control congruent words test, the color stimulus was color words all printed in black. In the incongruent words test the color stimulus was colored words printed in different colors to what they are written as ( Blue written in red ink). The dependent variable was the time it took the participants to name the colors. During the incongruent word test, participants were not allowed to leave any error
The results of the information processing lab support the text in a number of ways. As the number of choices increased, the total response time also increased, verifying Hick’s Law. This then indicates that as the trials became more complex, information processing time was influenced. However, the subjects were able to bypass the complexity of the task when they were able to preview the color or
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 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
Participants are asked to identify the color of the font, regardless of what the word says. A computer measures the accuracy of the response but also the time it takes to respond, which should be longer if they are shown an incongruent selection (Online Psychology Laboratory). In this test, the independent variable is whether the world and the color of the font were the same or different and the dependent variable is the response time. By looking at the response time compared to the word in the same or different color, the experimenters can observe the delayed response time they expect when the word and color don’t match.
When subjects are told to read the normal words, they dash right through the task. People name colors faster when color words correspond to ink color, rather than when color words are printed in black ink (Bower 1992). Increased effort enables the subjects to suppress the interference produced by the Stroop task (Amir 1996). Characteristic differences can also make a difference in results like level of education, age, or even anxiety levels. Anxious individuals are slower at color-naming threat related than non-threat related words in the emotional Stroop task (Amir 1996). More highly educated subjects perform better than less educated subjects (Houx 2007). This may be true because people receive far more training in reading color words than they do in naming colors (Bower
The aim of this experiment was to basically analyze how fast the brain can perceive color and describe words simultaneously with the Stroop Effect theory. The Stroop Test is also done to determine new findings on the human’s brain automaticity and how it processes certain functions. In reference, to the independent and dependent variables involved, the independent variable in this experiment would be the color word followed by the conflicting color and the dependent would be the time that it took for the applicant to make a decision. At the conclusion of the lab, applicants were to record their results as well as the group data results and new findings of how the brain functions under certain processes. However, the age differences and the reading comprehension levels of the applicants involved, may have also caused an error due to the lack in understanding of the of time intervals in the ending data.
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
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.
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.