A review of the day–night task: The Stroop paradigm and interference control in young children
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 Day-Night task requires children to inhibit a dominant verbal response rather than an instinctive motor response.
“Instead of inhibiting an instinctive motor response, the Day-Night task requires children to inhibit a dominant verbal response.”
From Assessing Executive Function in Preschoolers (2012) · cites this paper as Montgomery & Koeltzow, 2010
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 122 · Cited by 131
- Authors
- Montgomery, D. E., & Koeltzow, T. E.
- Affiliations
- Bradley University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Montgomery, Derek E.
- ORCID
- Montgomery, Derek E.
- Venue
- Developmental Review
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-09
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 308-330
- ISSN
- 0273-2297 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2048886757
- Cited by
- 131
- References
- 122
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 4.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Developmental Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- Stroop paradigm, interference control, young children, cognitive development, executive function, neural correlates, methodological issues
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
