Wang Jin, Tang Huijun, Deng Yuan
Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 16# Lincui Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100101, People's Republic of China.
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, People's Republic of China.
J Psycholinguist Res. 2016 Oct;45(5):1161-71. doi: 10.1007/s10936-015-9397-8.
The automaticity level and attention priority/strategy are two major theories that have attempted to explain the mechanism underlying the Stroop effect. Training is an effective way to manipulate the experience with the two dimensions (ink color and color word) in the Stroop task. In order to distinguish the above two factors (the automaticity or attention/strategy), we revised the training paradigm of MacLeod's study (J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 14(1):126-135, 1988) by adding a control condition for the Stroop task on Chinese. We found that with training, the changing pattern for the Stroop effect was similar in Stroop tasks in novel symbols and in Chinese, showing markedly increasing interference and marginally decreasing facilitation. The current findings support the strategy-based learning account at early stages of novel learning of written symbols.
自动化水平和注意优先级/策略是试图解释斯特鲁普效应潜在机制的两大主要理论。训练是在斯特鲁普任务中操控对两个维度（墨水颜色和颜色词）体验的有效方式。为了区分上述两个因素（自动化或注意/策略），我们对麦克劳德研究（《实验心理学杂志：学习、记忆与认知》，第14卷第1期，第126 - 135页，1988年）的训练范式进行了修订，增加了中文斯特鲁普任务的控制条件。我们发现，通过训练，新符号的斯特鲁普任务和中文的斯特鲁普任务中，斯特鲁普效应的变化模式相似，干扰显著增加，促进作用略有下降。当前研究结果支持书面符号新学习早期基于策略的学习观点。
