Stroop process dissociations: The relationship between facilitation and interference.

Lindsay, D. Stephen; Jacoby, Larry L.

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.2.219

Cited by 263 publications

(487 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

456

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Probably the most important demonstration of putatively controlled processes in the Stroop literature is the proportion congruent effect. The proportion congruent effect refers to the finding that the size of the Stroop effect is influenced by the proportion of congruent items in a block of trials (Lindsay & Jacoby, 1994;Logan & Zbrodoff, 1979). Specifically, the Stroop effect is much larger in a high proportion congruent block of trials than in a low proportion congruent block of trials.…”

Section: Implicit Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Schmidt

Crump

Cheesman

et al. 2007

Consciousness and Cognition

164

268

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The results of four experiments provide evidence for controlled processing in the absence of awareness. Participants identified the colour of a neutral distracter word. Each of four words (e.g., MOVE) was presented in one of four colours 75% of the time (Experiments 1 and 4) or 50% of the time (Experiment 2 and 3). Colour identification was faster when the words appeared in the colour they were most often presented in relative to when they appeared in another colour, even for participants who were subjectively unaware of any contingencies between the words and colours. An analysis of sequence effects showed that participants who were unaware of the relation between distracter words and colours nonetheless controlled the impact of the word on performance depending on the nature of the previous trial. A block analysis of contingencyunaware participants revealed that contingencies were learned rapidly in the first block of trials.Experiment 3 showed that the contingency effect does not depend on level of awareness, thus ruling out explicit strategy accounts. Finally, Experiment 4 showed that the contingency effect results from behavioural control and not from semantic association or stimulus familiarity. These results thus provide evidence for implicit control. Implicit Control 3Contingency Learning without Awareness: Evidence for Implicit Control Cognitive processes that are controlled are conventionally assumed to operate in a slow, effortful, and voluntary manner (Posner & Cohen, 1984;Posner & Snyder, 1975; Shiffrin & Schnieder, 1977). Thus, when researchers discuss the influence of "controlled" processes, it is typically assumed that such processes are explicit (i.e., conscious; cf., Besner & Stolz, 1999). As such, the term "implicit control" would seem to be nonsensical, because "implicit" (i.e., unconscious) seems to preclude the possibility of control. However, etymologically speaking this is not a necessary conclusion. The Oxford English Dictionary (2001) Evidence for cognitive control, which is assumed to be explicit and strategic in nature, has been drawn from the Stroop literature (Stroop, 1935). In the Stroop task, identification of the print colour of colour words is slower when the word and ink colour are incongruent (e.g., the word GREEN in orange; GREEN orange ) than when they are congruent (e.g., ORANGE orange ; see MacLeod, 1991, for a review). Probably the most important demonstration of putatively controlled processes in the Stroop literature is the proportion congruent effect. The proportion congruent effect refers to the finding that the size of the Stroop effect is influenced by the proportion of congruent items in a block of trials (Lindsay & Jacoby, 1994;Logan & Zbrodoff, 1979). Specifically, the Stroop effect is much larger in a high proportion congruent block of trials than in a low proportion congruent block of trials. This effect is commonly attributed to Implicit Control 4 participants explicitly learning to predict the colour from the word. Specifically, because the word us...

show abstract

Section: Implicit Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Schmidt

Crump

Cheesman

et al. 2007

Consciousness and Cognition

164

268

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lindsay and Jacoby (1994) did just that This represents a major extension of process dissociation; for the first time the method was applied to a cognitive task that has traditionally been measured in terms of speed, not accuracy.…”

Section: Dissociation Of the Stroop Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to have a measurable accuracy effect, Lindsay and Jacoby (1994) imposed deadlines for responses. They believed that doing so would shift the Stroop effect from speed to accuracy with little effect on underlying processing.…”

Section: Dissociation Of the Stroop Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been used primarily to show relative contributions of implicit and explicit memory in different tasks, but it has the potential to be used for other issues as well. Recently, Lindsay and Jacoby (1994) extended process dissociation to a visual identification task, the Stroop task, which appears to have underlying processes that sometimes compete and sometimes work in concert. The process dissociation method puts few explicit constraints on processing.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Process dissociation, cognitive architecture, and response time: Comments on Lindsay and Jacoby (1994).

Hillstrom¹,

Logan²

1997

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

), both of those assumptions were violated. It is argued that these violations were due to (a) an oversimplification of the processing architecture that ignores common stages such as guessing and response selection, (b) an assumption that the more automatic process (word reading) dominates over the intended process (color naming) in determining responses, and (c) an assumption that switching from the more common speeded response instruction (measuring speed) to a deadline response instruction (measuring, accuracy) does not change processing. General implications for applying process dissociation to dynamic tasks are discussed.Process dissociation is a method for determining how task accuracy is influenced by cognitive processes that are capable of either competing or working in conceit (Jacoby, 1991). It has been used primarily to show relative contributions of implicit and explicit memory in different tasks, but it has the potential to be used for other issues as well. Recently, Lindsay and Jacoby (1994) extended process dissociation to a visual identification task, the Stroop task, which appears to have underlying processes that sometimes compete and sometimes work in concert. The process dissociation method puts few explicit constraints on processing. But when we considered in detail how processing would be constrained by the assumptions of the method, the results are problematic, partly in ways addressed by earlier criticisms and partly in ways unique to the new domain. In particular, when one tries to reconcile this work with earlier work on understanding processing architecture of the Stroop task, three issues appear problematic: the assumption of processing independence, the side effects of applying deadlines to a dynamic process, and the characterization of automatic processing.

show abstract

“…Our analysis suggests, however, that this interpretation is unwarranted and the influences of other parameters could cause the observed correlations to be quite low even if the 820 Psychon Bull Rev (2013) 20:819-858 A third example involves the correlation between costs and benefits-measured relative to a common neutral condition-in the Stroop color-naming task (e.g., Brown, 2011). Intuitively, it seems clear that this correlation should be large if costs and benefits are determined by the same mechanism, and researchers have therefore measured this correlation to assess single-mechanism accounts of Stroop effects (e.g., Brown, 2011;Lindsay & Jacoby, 1994). Our analysis shows, however, that this intuition is wrong, because the correlation of costs and benefits can be very small or negative even when a single-mechanism account is correct.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mental chronometry and individual differences: Modeling reliabilities and correlations of reaction time means and effect sizes

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used a general stage-based model of reaction time (RT) to investigate the psychometric properties of mean RTs and experimental effect sizes (i.e., differences in mean RTs). Using the model, formulas were derived for the reliabilities of mean RTs and RT difference scores, and these formulas provide guidance about the number of trials per participant needed to obtain reliable estimates of these measures. In addition, formulas were derived for various different types of correlations computed in RT research (e.g., correlations between a mean RT and an external non-RT measure, between two mean RTs, between a mean RT and an RT effect size). The analysis revealed that observed RT-based correlations depend on many parameters of the underlying processes contributing to RT. We conclude that these correlations often fail to support the inferences drawn from them and that their proper interpretation is far more complex than is generally acknowledged.

show abstract

Stroop process dissociations: The relationship between facilitation and interference.

Cited by 263 publications

References 30 publications

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control

Process dissociation, cognitive architecture, and response time: Comments on Lindsay and Jacoby (1994).

Mental chronometry and individual differences: Modeling reliabilities and correlations of reaction time means and effect sizes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About