Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Canada.
Psychol Rev. 2007 Oct;114(4):1076-86. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.1076.
M. M. Botvinick, T. S. Braver, D. M. Barch, C. S. Carter, and J. D. Cohen (2001) implemented their conflict-monitoring hypothesis of cognitive control in a series of computational models. The authors of the current article first demonstrate that M. M. Botvinick et al.'s (2001) conflict-monitoring Stroop model fails to simulate L. L. Jacoby, D. S. Lindsay, and S. Hessels's (2003) report of an item-specific proportion-congruent (ISPC) effect in the Stroop task. The authors then implement a variant of M. M. Botvinick et al.'s model based on the assumption that control must be able to operate at the item level. This model successfully simulates the ISPC effect. In addition, the model provides an alternative to M. M. Botvinick et al.'s explanation of the list-level proportion-congruent effect in terms of an ISPC effect. Implications of the present modeling effort are discussed.
M. M. Botvinick、T. S. Braver、D. M. Barch、C. S. Carter 和 J. D. Cohen（2001）在一系列计算模型中实现了他们的认知控制冲突监测假说。本文作者首先证明，M. M. Botvinick 等人（2001）的冲突监测 Stroop 模型无法模拟 L. L. Jacoby、D. S. Lindsay 和 S. Hessels（2003）在 Stroop 任务中报告的项目特定比例一致（ISPC）效应。然后，作者基于控制必须能够在项目级别上运行的假设，实现了 M. M. Botvinick 等人模型的变体。该模型成功地模拟了 ISPC 效应。此外，该模型为 M. M. Botvinick 等人用 ISPC 效应来解释列表级比例一致效应提供了一种替代解释。本文对当前建模工作的影响进行了讨论。
