Examining Attentional Interference and the Stroop Effect wit

The results of the stroop effect have been replicated many times in many variations. A study by Liotti et al. (2000) found significant effects between congruent (same color-word and ink color) and incongruent (different ink color than color-word) trials using a mixed-trial stroop task. Similar results were found in an auditory stroop effect task (Barber and Green, 1981). With stimuli presented on the basis of the speed of speaker gender judgments, the study found significant results supporting the reliability and robustness of the stroop effect.

While many studies have replicated the findings of the stroop effect, the cause of the phenomenon is highly debated. Several theories have been proposed, but there are two that seem plausible. The first is the response-competit

The complete results, displayed in table 1, show an increase in reaction time from control to congruent to incongruent trials, as is evident through the means of each group. In accordance with the prediction, the results show a decrease in reaction time as a function of intelligence.

Some topics in this essay:
Boutilier Stoltz, Hoc LSD, Stroop Task, Ridley Stroop, Barber Green, Logan Zbrodoff, Morten Chambers, Stroop Effect”, Henik Tzelgov, Drysdale Fulham, stroop effect, incongruent trials, ink color, found significant, congruent incongruent, stroop task, difference congruent incongruent, difference congruent, significant difference congruent, significant difference, automaticity theory, control congruent, congruent incongruent trials, incongruent ink color, cause stroop effect,