A group of 69 12-year-old children performed three well-known response interference tasks: the Stroop task, the Eriksen flanker task, and the Simon task. Individual differences in accuracy and speed correlated across the tasks. However, there was no correlation between the interference effects on these three tasks. Stroop interference, but not the Simon or flanker effect, was correlated with working memory capacity, as obtained from the WISC-R. These results may help clarify the nature of ADHD, which is characterized by problems with response interference.
Keywords: Stroop, Simon, Flanker, WISC, attention deficitIn order to select and execute an appropriate response, humans often have to ignore certain information that is strongly linked to another, yet inappropriate, response. This ability to deal with sources of conflict is known as interference control, and underlies our ability to achieve long-term goals, despite the presence of sources of distraction in the environment. Interference control is thought to be mediated, in part, by working memory (e.g., de Fockert, Rees, Frith, & Lavie, 2001). For some people inadequate interference control and working memory problems may cause significant problems in their daily lives, and is generally thought to underlie neuropsychological deficits such as observed in attentiondeficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), a common childhood disorder (e.g., Barkley, 1997).Neuropsychological studies and clinical investigations often make use of tasks that are designed to index response interference. Often used tasks are the Stroop task and the Eriksen flanker task. In both tasks, the subject is presented with a stimulus that simultaneously activates two conflicting response channels; one response is activated by the instructions, whereas the other response is activated by elements in the array that strongly invite an alternative-yet incorrect-response. For example, in the Color WORD Stroop task (Stroop, 1935), the instruction is to attend to the color of the ink in which a word is printed and name this color aloud. At the same time, the printed words may also read certain color names that are different from the color of the ink in which it is printed. As has been observed on numerous occasions, there is a strong tendency to respond to the This research was financially supported by The Netherlands Organization for Scientific content of the word, and not to the ink color. This is evidenced by an increase in response time and a decrease in accuracy relative to a neutral control condition. Moreover, this pattern of response interference seems to be exaggerated in ADHD. For example, Carter et al. (1995; see also Salo, Henik, and Robertson, 2001) showed that children with ADHD have more difficulty suppressing the response associated with the word content than controls, as evidenced by the reaction time (RT) profiles of the two groups.In a similar vein, in the Eriksen flanker task subjects have to respond to one element in a stimulus array and ignore other elements in the array that desi...