A New interference score for the Stroop test

Abstract

A New interference calculation method for the Stroop test was developed based upon a neuropsychological model of the suppression of word reading in favor of color naming. Polynomial regression equations show a significant relationship between word reading and the New interference score that closely fits the underlying prediction of the New model, while the Golden [Stroop Color and Word Test, Stoelting Co., IL, Wood Dale, 1978] model (Old) produces only a random relationship. Constructs of developmental maturation and lateralized brain damage are supported by the New but not the Old method. The New compared to the Old method also gives a significant reduction in scores in a small sample of demented patients. It would be advisable to use this New model in both cognitive and neuropsychological comparisons of different lesions or different stimulus and response demands. The New model will also help promote finer clinical inferences when an understanding relative to the patient's own baselines is necessary.

The Stroop Color and Word Test

“…However, experimental data suggests that the increased reading practice does not affect the susceptibility to interference in SCWT (Jensen and Rohwer, 1966). Chafetz and Matthews (2004)'s article might be useful for a deeper understanding of the relationship between reading words and naming colors, but the debate about the role of reading ability on the inhibition process is still open. The issue about the role of reading ability on the SCWT performance cannot be adequately satisfied even if the Victoria Stroop Test scoring method (Strauss et al, 2006b) is adopted, since the absence of the standard W condition.…”

“…Amato et al (2006) and Caffarra et al (2002) describe the SCWT score as a measure of the fronto-executive functioning, while others use it as an index of the attentional functioning (Barbarotto et al, 1998; Valgimigli et al, 2010) or of general cognitive efficiency (Brugnolo et al, 2015). Slowing to a response conflict would be due to a failure of selective attention or a lack in the cognitive efficiency instead of a failure of response inhibition (Chafetz and Matthews, 2004); however, the performance in the SCWT is not exclusively related to concentration, attention or cognitive effectiveness, but it relies to a more specific executive-frontal domain. Indeed, subjects have to process selectively a specific visual feature blocking out continuously the automatic processing of reading (Zajano and Gorman, 1986; Shum et al, 1990), in order to solve correctly the task.…”

Dynamic Prediction of Motor Diagnosis in Huntington’s Disease Using a Joint Modeling Approach

“…All structural imaging measures were expressed as a ratio of reginal volume to intracranial volume. Stroop word test [10] examined the effects of interference on reading ability, and scores were generated using the number of items correctly completed. A higher Stroop word score reflected better performance on ability to read out loud.…”

Stroop Color and Word Test

“…However, experimental data suggests that the increased reading practice does not affect the susceptibility to interference in SCWT (Jensen and Rohwer, 1966). Chafetz and Matthews (2004)'s article might be useful for a deeper understanding of the relationship between reading words and naming colors, but the debate about the role of reading ability on the inhibition process is still open. The issue about the role of reading ability on the SCWT performance cannot be adequately satisfied even if the Victoria Stroop Test scoring method (Strauss et al, 2006b) is adopted, since the absence of the standard W condition.…”

“…Amato et al (2006) and Caffarra et al (2002) describe the SCWT score as a measure of the fronto-executive functioning, while others use it as an index of the attentional functioning (Barbarotto et al, 1998;Valgimigli et al, 2010) or of general cognitive efficiency (Brugnolo et al, 2015). Slowing to a response conflict would be due to a failure of selective attention or a lack in the cognitive efficiency instead of a failure of response inhibition (Chafetz and Matthews, 2004); however, the performance in the SCWT is not exclusively related to concentration, attention or cognitive effectiveness, but it relies to a more specific executive-frontal domain. Indeed, subjects have to process selectively a specific visual feature blocking out continuously the automatic processing of reading (Zajano and Gorman, 1986;Shum et al, 1990), in order to solve correctly the task.…”