Increased Stroop interference with better second-language reading skill

Abstract

Skilled readers demonstrate remarkable efficiency in processing written words, unlike beginning readers for whom reading occurs more serially and places higher demands on visual attention. In the present study, we used the Stroop paradigm to investigate the relationship between reading skill and automaticity, in individuals learning a second language with a different orthographic system. Prior studies using this paradigm have presented a mixed picture, finding a positive, a negative, or no relationship between the size of Stroop interference and reading skills. Our results show that Stroop interference in the second language was positively related to reading skill (when controlled for interference in the first language). Furthermore, interference was positively related to objective but not subjective indices of the amount of exposure to the second language. We suggest that the lack of consistency in the results of earlier studies may be due, at least in part, to these studies looking at Stroop interference in isolation, rather than comparing interference between languages.

What Stroop tasks can tell us about selective attention from childhood to adulthood

“…This suggests that interference may not alter with age, although it should be noted that, by contrasting congruent against incongruent condition, Ikeda et al . () may have indexed combined interference and facilitation, rather than isolating only interference (Braet et al ., ). Notwithstanding, taking Ikeda et al .…”

“…Of relevance, Braet et al . () contrasted a congruent condition and an incongruent condition on an unmixed task, yielding an effect that, on our conception here, was actually a composite of facilitation + interference (see also Eidels, ; Ikeda et al ., for application of this index). Assuming the interference component was relatively stable (see above), their association will reflect mostly the facilitation component.…”

“…Of note, Braet et al . 's () index was found to increase with adults’ reading skill. This is precisely what we would expect if Stroop effects such as facilitation result partly from reading issues (Faccioli et al ., ; Lorsbach & Reimer, ; Protopapas et al ., ; Wright, ).…”

High and Low Stimulus-Driven Conflict Engage Segregated Brain Networks, Not Quantitatively Different Resources

“…These studies showed that degree of familiarity of the language in which words were presented modulated Stroop effects, with smaller conflicts when the color words were written in an unfamiliar than in a familiar language (Grass 1984;Mohamed Zied et al 2004;Healy 2004, 2008;Braet et al 2011;Aron 2011; though see Lee and Chan 2000). These studies parsimoniously interpreted such modulation in terms of the same inhibitory control process being engaged independently of strength of the Stroop conflict, but more strongly in high than low conflict situations.…”

“…There was no evidence for an interaction at the level of the GFP (Color figure online) b investigations of Stroop effects in which the strength of stimulus-induced conflict was manipulated (e.g. Mohamed Zied et al 2004;Healy 2004, 2008;Braet et al 2011;Youn 2011). These behavioral studies accounted for their pattern of results by positing that the brain mechanisms engaged to resolve high versus low conflict differed only quantitatively: the same inhibitory control mechanisms being engaged more strongly to cope with high than low conflict.…”