Training on integrated versus separated Stroop tasks: The progression of interference and facilitation.
Open accessAbstract
Two experiments examined the course of interference and facilitation in the Stroop (1935) task during training. Two versions of the task were compared: integrated (e.g., the word RED in the color green) and separated (e.g., green asterisks above the word RED). Stimuli were congruent (RED in red), incongruent (GREEN in red), or neutral (XXX in red). Over 5-day (Experiment 1) and 10-day (Experiment 2) training sessions, facilitation due to congruence was small, stable, and equivalent in both task versions. In contrast, interference declined sharply on the integrated task over Days 1-3, then slowed to parallel the gradual decline on the separated task. Finally, training on the color naming task did not affect a word reading task administered after training. These findings imply that (a) Stroop interference initially reflects two problems--overcoming integration and managing two conflicting information sources; (b) with practice, the larger integration problem is solved relatively quickly, rendering the integrated and separated tasks quite comparable thereafter; and (c) facilitation and interference in the Stroop task may be independent. These results challenge extant theories of the Stroop effect, which do not predict such effects.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 goal-maintenance mechanism is partly responsible for producing Stroop facilitation effects sometimes observed on congruent trials compared with neutral trials.
“Our data also imply that the goal-maintenance mechanism is partly responsible for producing the Stroop -facilitation‖ effects that are sometimes observed on congruent trials compared with neutral trials”
From Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. (2003) · cites this paper as MacLeod, 1998
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 166
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- DUNBAR, K., & MACLEOD, C. M. (1984). A horse race of a differentcolor: Stroop interferencepatterns with transformed words.Journal ofexper- imental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 622-639.
- KAHNEMAN, D., & CHAJCZYK, D. (1983).Testsof the automaticityof read- ing: Dilutionof Stroop effectsby color-irrelevantstimuli.Journal ofEx- perimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,9, 497-509.
- MACLEOD, C. M. (1991). Halfa century ofresearch on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163-203.
- MACLEOD, C. M., & DUNBAR, K. (1988). Training and Stroop-like inter- ference: Evidence for a continuum ofautomaticity. Journal ofexperi- mental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 126-135.
- SHIFFRIN, R M. (1988). Attention. In R. C. Atkinson, R. 1. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey, & R. D. Luce (Eds.), Stevens' handbook ofexperimental psychology (pp. 739-811). New York: Wiley.
- Authors
- Macleod, C. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Macleod, Colin M.
- ORCID
- Macleod, Colin M.
- Venue
- Memory & Cognition
- Published
- 1998-03
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 201-211
- ISSN
- 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5946
- OpenAlex
- W2028935191
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 1.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (A7459)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- Stroop interference, interference, facilitation, congruences, color naming, word reading, dual-process models, cognitive control, practice effects
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attention, Color Perception, Discrimination Learning, Female, Generalization, Psychological, Humans, Male, Practice, Psychological, Problem Solving, Reaction Time, Reading, Semantics
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
