Radboud University Nijmegen, 6525 HR Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2010 Mar;36(2):411-22. doi: 10.1037/a0018523.
Disagreement exists about whether color-word Stroop facilitation is caused by converging information (e.g., Cohen et al., 1990; Roelofs, 2003) or inadvertent reading (MacLeod & MacDonald, 2000). Four experiments tested between these hypotheses by examining Stroop effects on response time (RT) both within and between languages. Words cannot be read aloud to produce facilitation between languages. Dutch-English bilingual participants named color patches while trying to ignore Dutch or English color words presented at a wide range of preexposure and postexposure stimulus onset asynchronies. The color patches were named in Dutch (Experiments 1 and 2) or English (Experiments 3 and 4). In all experiments, Stroop facilitation and interference effects were obtained in mean RTs with similar time courses within and between languages. Facilitation was generally present throughout the entire RT distributions. These results suggest that Stroop interference and facilitation have a common locus within and between languages, supporting the converging information hypothesis of Stroop facilitation.
关于颜色-词斯特鲁普效应是由信息汇聚(如 Cohen 等人,1990;Roelofs,2003)还是无意中的阅读引起的,存在争议。通过在语言内和语言间检查对反应时间 (RT) 的斯特鲁普效应,四项实验检验了这两种假设。单词不能大声朗读,以在语言之间产生促进作用。荷兰-英语双语参与者在尝试忽略以广泛的预暴露和后暴露刺激起始异步呈现的荷兰语或英语颜色词的同时,命名颜色补丁。颜色补丁用荷兰语(实验 1 和 2)或英语(实验 3 和 4)命名。在所有实验中,在语言内和语言间,斯特鲁普促进和干扰效应在平均 RT 中均具有相似的时程。促进作用通常存在于整个 RT 分布中。这些结果表明,斯特鲁普干扰和促进在语言内和语言间具有共同的位置,支持斯特鲁普促进的信息汇聚假说。