Schmidt James R, Lemercier Céline
1 Department of Experimental Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
2 Cognition, Langues, Langage, Ergonomie (CLLE)-Laboratoire Travail et Cognition (LTC), Toulouse University, Toulouse, France.
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 May;72(5):1119-1130. doi: 10.1177/1747021818787155. Epub 2018 Jul 17.
Conflict between task-relevant and task-irrelevant stimulus information leads to impairment in response speed and accuracy. For instance, in the colour-word Stroop paradigm, participants respond slower and less accurately to the print colour of incongruent colour words (e.g., "red" printed in green) than to congruent colour words (e.g., "green" in green). Importantly, this congruency effect is diminished when the trials in an experiment are mostly incongruent, relative to mostly congruent, termed a proportion congruent effect. When distracting stimuli are mostly congruent in one context (e.g., location or font) but mostly incongruent in another context (e.g., another location or font), the congruency effect is still diminished in the mostly incongruent context, termed a context-specific proportion congruent (CSPC) effect. Both the standard proportion congruent and CSPC effects are typically interpreted in terms of conflict-driven attentional control, frequently termed conflict adaptation or conflict monitoring. However, in two experiments, we investigated contingency learning confounds in context-specific proportion congruent effects. In particular, two variants of a dissociation procedure are presented with the font variant of the CSPC procedure. In both, robust contingency learning effects were observed. No evidence for context-specific control was observed. In fact, results trended in the wrong direction. In all, the results suggest that CSPC effects may not be a useful way of studying attentional control.
与任务相关和与任务无关的刺激信息之间的冲突会导致反应速度和准确性受损。例如，在颜色-单词斯特鲁普范式中，与一致的颜色单词（如绿色的“绿色”）相比，参与者对不一致的颜色单词（如绿色印刷的“红色”）的印刷颜色反应更慢且准确性更低。重要的是，当实验中的试验大多不一致时，相对于大多一致的情况，这种一致性效应会减弱，这被称为比例一致性效应。当干扰刺激在一种情境（如位置或字体）中大多一致，但在另一种情境（如另一个位置或字体）中大多不一致时，在大多不一致的情境中一致性效应仍然会减弱，这被称为情境特定比例一致性（CSPC）效应。标准比例一致性效应和CSPC效应通常都根据冲突驱动的注意力控制来解释，通常称为冲突适应或冲突监测。然而，在两项实验中，我们研究了情境特定比例一致性效应中的偶然性学习混淆。特别是，提出了CSPC程序字体变体的解离程序的两种变体。在这两种变体中，都观察到了强大的偶然性学习效应。没有观察到情境特定控制的证据。事实上，结果朝着错误的方向发展。总体而言，结果表明CSPC效应可能不是研究注意力控制的有用方法。
