An ERP investigation of the Stroop task: The role of the cingulate in attentional allocation and conflict resolution
Abstract
The majority of studies support a role of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) in the attentional control necessary for conflict resolution in the Stroop task; however, the time course of activation and the neural substrates underlying the Stroop task remain contentious. We used high-density EEG to record visual-evoked potentials from 16 healthy subjects while performing a manual version of the traditional Stroop colour-word task. Difference waveforms for congruent-control and incongruent-control conditions were similar in amplitude and had a similar spatial distribution in the time window of 260-430 ms post stimulus onset. Source estimation indicated particularly middle cingulate involvement in congruent-control and incongruent-control difference waveforms. In contrast, the difference waveform for the incongruent-congruent contrast was observed later (in the time window of 370-480 ms), had a different spatial distribution, and source estimation indicated that the anterior cingulate underlies this difference waveform. As congruent-control and incongruent-control differences have a similar timeframe and cingulate source, we propose that this indicates early attentional allocation processes. That is, the identification of two sources of information (the word and the colour it is printed in) and the selective attention to one. The later peak in the incongruent-congruent difference wave, originating in anterior cingulate, likely reflects identification (and subsequent resolution) of conflict in the two sources of information.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The MCG has been implicated in performance monitoring via conflict detection, reallocation of attentional resources according to task-relevant information, and corresponding action formation.
“Moreover, the MCG has also been implicated in performance monitoring via conflict detection in information processing, reallocation of attentional resources according to task-relevant information, and corresponding action formation (Badzakova-Trajkov et al. 2009).”
From Large-scale functional neural network correlates of response inhibition: an fMRI meta-analysis (2017) · cites this paper as Badzakova-Trajkov et al. 2009
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 60 · Cited by 121
- Authors
- Badzakova-Trajkov, G., Barnett, K. J., Waldie, K. E., & Kirk, I. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Auckland (NZ)
- Venue
- Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2009-02
- Volume
- 1253
- Pages
- 139-148
- ISSN
- 0006-8993 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2081826406
- Cited by
- 121
- References
- 60
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 2.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Brain Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Auckland
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
- Keywords
- Stroop task, anterior cingulate cortex, middle cingulate cortex, conflict resolution, attention allocation, visual evoked potentials, source localization, selective attention
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analysis of Variance, Attention, Brain Mapping, Color, Color Perception, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Problem Solving, Reaction Time, Reading, Task Performance and Analysis, Tomography
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review